text:
Home » Blog » Small Business » The 10 Best States For Women-Led Startups In 2021
The 10 Best States For Women-Led Startups In 2021
Posted by: Jared Beilby
If you're a startup west of the Mississippi, you're already headed on the path toward entrepreneurial success, according to our inaugural Merchant Maverick "Best States For Women-Led Startups in 2021" report.
The genesis of our report was simple: We wanted to determine which states are best (and which are worst) for women-led startups, a sector of the economy that's seen substantial growth in recent years. And, even though startups led solely by women eclipsed the $17 billion mark nationwide in venture capital funding in both 2018 and 2019, we quickly found not every state offers the same opportunities.
So what do the numbers say?
By and large, the tale of the tape is pretty straightforward: the part of the country that lies west of the Mississippi is great for startups led by women entrepreneurs. Per our overall ranking, seven of the top 10 states hail from the West, including the top two: Colorado and Washington.
As a whole, the top 10 states fare particularly well when it comes to engaging women entrepreneurs — 1.7% of all women in these states are self-employed in their own business, which compares favorably to the national average of 1.4%. The top 10 also see better-than-average rankings in terms of how many employees their women-led businesses hire. When looking at our "percent of those employed by women-led firms" metric, none of the overall top 10 is ranked worse than 19th and six manage to crack the metric's top 10.
On the flip side, several states in the Great Plains, Midwest, and South seem to struggle in offering women entrepreneurs similar opportunities to their male counterparts. In many cases, these lower-ranked states receive inadequate amounts of capital for venture-backed startups led by women. They also struggle to match the gender parity seen by higher-ranked states.
Our methodology is explained in more detail below, but here are the basic metrics we explored for this report:
Percent of employer firms led by women
Percent of employees at women-led firms
Percent of women self-employed in their own business
Average income of women self-employed in their own business
Total venture capital invested into women-led startups
Percent of startups still active after one year
State income tax rates
Unemployment rates
Of course, we can't write this report without giving proper weight to the effects of COVID. The pandemic has changed the economic landscape over the past year, and often for the worse. This means that not every metric may be able to accurately gauge how a state might fare amidst the pandemic. To help factor in COVID's impact, we included some metrics that take 2020 into account, but it will be a while until we get a full picture of the pandemic's devastation.
The Top 10 States For Women-Led Startups
The Bottom 10 States For Women-Led Startups
Complete Ranking Of All 50 States
While the West has certainly stolen the show, the top 10 list still includes a few states outside that geographic area. Unsurprisingly, all offer relatively good gender parity for entrepreneurs. Some stand out as solid states for startups, while others feature tantalizingly low state income tax rates.
1. Colorado
The top two states are in a league of their own, and for good reason. Colorado, home to budding startup scenes in Denver and Boulder, simply out-classes most other states beyond No. 2 Washington. Most notably, Colorado ranks in the top 10 in four out of our five gender-specific metrics. This includes engagement among women entrepreneurs (2.19% of all women in the state run their own business) and venture capital funding ($485 million in VC money went to Colorado startups led only by women in the past five years). Both those numbers rank fourth nationally in their respective metrics.
Beyond both those impressive stats, the Centennial State ranks highly when comparing female business leaders to their male counterparts. 27.7% of employer firms in Colorado are led by women (fifth nationally) and 19.9% of employees in the state work for women-led firms (eighth nationally).
In addition, Colorado features a minimal state income tax that maxes out at a relatively paltry 4.6%. And while not directly included in our metrics, the state's up-and-coming startup hubs can make for an appealing alternative to the always-pricier Silicon Valley in nearby California.
A longtime host to a number of tech-focused companies, Washington joins Colorado as one of only two states to place in the top 10 in four out of our five gender-specific metrics. In particular, 28.2% of Washington employer firms are led by women. That number is good for fifth in the country.
For other leading numbers, Washington comes in at sixth for the percentage of employees employed at women-led firms (20.0%) as well as the amount of capital invested into venture-backed startups led by women ($398 million over the last five years). The state also does a good job engaging women entrepreneurs — 1.66% of all women in Washington are self-employed in their own business.
The Evergreen State also lacks a state income tax, which could be enticing for many entrepreneurs. Looking beyond the numbers, Washington has also proven to be a solid alternative for startups looking for a nearby home outside of California.
3. Virginia
While North Carolina is often seen as an emerging tech hub, it looks as though Virginia is leading the South Atlantic's gender parity push. Virginia has a few standout metrics by our count, with none really posing as a weakness. For instance, the state tops the rest of the country with a whopping 90.5% startup early survival rate (over six percentage points higher than second-place Massachusetts).
In terms of gender-specific metrics, 27.0% of businesses in Virginia are run by women and 20.0% of all the state's employees work for women-led firms. Both those numbers place solidly in the top 10 of their metrics (ninth and seventh, respectively). It's also noteworthy that the Commonwealth has a 5.3% unemployment rate, which trails only Montana's 4.9% among the top 10 states.
Florida makes waves with strong entrepreneur engagement among women as well as with hefty VC funding. 2.01% of all women in the Sunshine State are self-employed in their own business (a number that's 6th nationally). And the state's VC funding towards women's startups also clocks in the top 10 with $219 million generated over the past five years. Plus, Florida features no income tax.
Of course, there are a few areas where Florida could do better. Self-employed women business owners only average a yearly income of $57,871 (27th nationally) and the state's 6.5% unemployment trends a bit high.
5. Montana
Montana might not be first on people's minds when it comes to good places to launch a startup, but the state posts excellent numbers favoring entrepreneurial women. Compared to the rest of the country, Montana features the second-highest rate of women business owners and the second-highest average income among those women business owners: 2.41% of all women in Montana are self-employed in their own business, and those women make an average income of $85,064.
Unfortunately, venture capital is almost non-existent for women-led startups in Montana. In the past five years, the state has only seen $90K in venture capital go to startups led solely by women.
As an economic powerhouse, it's not a shock to see the Lone Star State high up in these rankings. Texas has the fifth-most employees working at firms run by women at 20.1%. The state has also received $365 billion in VC funding for women-led startups in the past five years, a number that ranks seventh overall. Texas' lack of an income tax doesn't hurt, either.
Still, Texas falls somewhat short in engaging women entrepreneurs — just 1.27% of all women in the state run their own business — and the $55,907 average income for self-employed women business owners in Texas ranks a lowly 31st.
7. Oregon
At first glance, Oregon looks pretty similar to its northern neighbor, Washington. This state puts up great numbers in terms of gender parity: 21.8% of employees in Oregon work at businesses run by women, helping the Beaver State rank third overall in the US on this metric. Oregon also boasts 27.5% of employer firms run by women, while 1.67% of all women in the state are self-employed in their own business, numbers that rank sixth and seventh in their respective metrics.
The one big difference between Oregon and the higher-ranked Washington? Oregon has one of the highest income tax rates in the country. At 9.9%, Oregon's highest tax bracket is the 47th highest income tax rate in the country — a far cry from Washington's 0% income tax.
8. Alaska
Pound-for-pound, Alaska stacks up well in gender parity metrics. The state leads the country in one important respect: 29.8% of all its employer businesses are run by women. Meanwhile, an impressive 22.7% of employees work at those women-led businesses, causing Alaska to rank second only to one other state in this metric. When you couple those stats with a lack of state income tax and an 81.8% startup early survival rate, it's hard to overlook the Frontier State.
Alaska struggles to engage women entrepreneurs, however. Just 0.96% of all women in the state are self-employed in their own business, a number that trails the rest of the top 10 by a wide margin.
As the home of Silicon Valley, California is a hotbed for startups. When it comes to venture capital investment, California leads the country, with a staggering $3.9 billion poured into startups run solely by women. Startups are able to use that money to survive — 81.3% make it past their first year, making California rank sixth nationally in this respect. Self-employed women business owners also average $74,438 per year in the Golden State, which is also sixth highest in the nation.
California does impose a hefty income tax, though; at 13.3% residents may wind up paying more state income tax here than anywhere else. And the state's 9.3% unemployment rate pushes California 46th in the nation.
10. Maine
Rounding out the top 10 is Maine. This state fares particularly well in terms of engagement for women entrepreneurs and average income. Maine ranks fifth overall for the percentage of women self-employed in their own business, at 2.06%. With a $75,760 average income for those business owners, Maine ranks fourth in the country.
However, capital for venture-backed, women-led startups hasn't been stellar. Maine startups led solely by women have only received $6 million in funding in the past five years. The state's 7.2% income tax is also the 41st highest.
Now that we've deep-dived into the best-of-the-best, let's take a look at which states wound up at the bottom of our list:
41. Idaho… Limited venture capital investments, low average income, and a higher-than-average income tax rate place Idaho just inside the bottom 10.
42. Ohio… A lack of high-ranking metrics means Ohio can't be rescued from some pitiful numbers — only 0.90% of all women in the state are self-employed in their own business.
43. Wisconsin… The Badger State isn't necessarily terrible in any one metric, but no single metric stands out. In fact, Wisconsin has only one modestly decent result: Its 5.7% unemployment rate is ranked 22nd.
44. North Dakota… Generally all over the board, three metrics contribute to North Dakota's bottom 10 ranking: venture capital investments into women-led startups (ranked 47th), percent of employer firms run by women (48th), and percent of employees employed at women-led firms (48th).
45. South Dakota… The state is dead last in percent of employer firms run by women and the average income of self-employed women business owners. It's also 49th in percent of employees employed at women-led firms. However, no state income tax and a 3.6% unemployment rate help slightly salvage the home of Mount Rushmore's overall ranking.
46. Arkansas… This state manages to break the top 30 in just two metrics: percent of employer firms run by women (ranked 27th) and unemployment rate (28th).
47. Iowa… While Iowa sits in the top 10 for unemployment rate and startup early survival rate, the state's poor gender parity and a high income tax rate position it squarely in the bottom 10 overall.
48. West Virginia… With only 20.1% of employer firms in the state run by women and $0 in venture capital going toward women-led startups, the Mountain State puts up an overall lackluster performance.
49. Nebraska… Despite having the lowest unemployment rate among all states, Nebraska struggles mightily with gender parity — just 13.3% of employees in the state are employed at women-led firms, a number ranking firmly in last place.
50. Mississippi… The Magnolia State finds itself in the bottom 10 in almost every metric. However, there is one bright spot: Mississippi's 80.5% startup early survival rate is eighth-best in the country.
For this report, we gathered data from eight separate metrics for all 50 US states. The data for each metric was normalized from 0-100 so that the highest-ranked state within a given metric had a score of 100 and the lowest-ranked state had a score of 0. These normalized scores were then multiplied by specific weights to achieve the overall score for each state.
Our data was pulled from six separate sources:
US Census Bureau's 2018 Annual Business Survey
US Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey
PitchBook's US VC Female Founders Dashboard
Kauffman Indicators of Entrepreneurship
Tax-Rates.org
US Bureau of Labor Statistics
To best determine the best states for women-led startups, we chose these metrics:
Percent of employer firms led by women (15% of the overall score): This metric compares the number of employer firms led by women to the total number of employer firms in the state, per data from the Census Bureau's 2018 Annual Business Survey. It provides a very basic look at the level of gender parity in each state.
Percent of employees at women-led firms (15%): This metric compares the number of employees at women-led employers firms to the total number of employees in the state, per data from the Census Bureau's 2018 Annual Business Survey. It provides another sample to estimate gender parity, as well as the economic strength of women-led firms on a state-by-state basis.
Percent of women self-employed in their own business (15%): This metric compares the number of women self-employed in their own business to the total number of women in the state, per the US Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey. It gauges how actively women engage in entrepreneurial roles within each state.
Average income of women self-employed in their own business (15%): This is simply the average yearly income for self-employed women business owners, per the US Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey. It provides a glimpse at the earning potential a woman entrepreneur might have state-from-state.
Total venture capital invested into women-led startups (15%): For this metric, data from PitchBook's US VC Female Founders Dashboard was recorded to calculate the amount of capital invested into venture-backed startups led solely by women within each state. Data over a five-year period from 2016 through October 2020 was included.
Percent of startups still active after one year (10%): Also known as startup early survival rate, this metric measures the immediate survival of startups and uses data from the 2019 edition of the Kauffman Indicators of Entrepreneurship. Early survival rate doesn't gauge the long-term health of startups, but it gives key insights into the success rate of young startups on a state-by-state basis.
State income tax rates (7.5%): Each state's highest income tax bracket for 2020 was tallied, with lower tax rates being considered better. States with lower income tax rates can provide entrepreneurs greater earning potential.
Unemployment rates (7.5%): These rates were pulled from the Bureau of Labor Statistic's October 2020 update. For the purposes of this report, unemployment rates are used as a snapshot to gauge the economic health of each state.
While most metrics consider data from before 2020, two incorporate data from this past year: venture capital investments and unemployment rates. Both these metrics are current as of October 2020. Such current data helps provide some insight on how COVID might have impacted women-led startups on a state level.
For the complete look at how all 50 states fared in our ranking, take a peek below:
While some states are certainly doing better than others, it's clear there is still much to improve when it comes to gender parity within entrepreneurship.
Nationwide, just 23.8% of employer firms are run by women and only 18% of all employees are employed at those women-led firms. Self-employed female business owners also earn less money than their male counterparts. Our research shows that women business owners make $59,415 per year on average compared to the $103,047 that men make. Venture capital for women-led startups is also lackluster — PitchBook says that in the US just 2.7% of total capital invested into venture-backed startups goes to those led only by women. Grants specifically for women-owned businesses help, but can hardly fill the gap.
For the time being, it seems the West is making the charge at leveling the gender playing field. Alongside the seven states in the top 10, other western states such as Arizona, Wyoming, and New Mexico also put up respectable showings in our overall ranking. Hopefully, the rest of the country can follow this lead to make entrepreneurship a more inclusive sector of the economy — especially during the rebuilding process post-COVID.
Jared Beilby
Jared is a writer hailing from the Pacific Northwest. Besides writing for Merchant Maverick, he has experience writing about sports and video games. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Journalism from George Fox University.
Latest posts by Jared Beilby (see all)
PPP, EIDL Program Reopenings & 4 More Small Business News Stories You Need To Know - January 15, 2021
New PPP Guidance & 4 More Small Business News Stories You Need To Know - January 8, 2021
The 10 Best States For Women-Led Startups In 2021 - January 4, 2021
Congress Passes New PPP Legislation, Targeted EIDL Program - December 21, 2020
Rampant PPP Fraud & 4 More Small Business News Stories You Need To Know - December 11, 2020
Annual Business Survey 2018 — US Census Bureau
American Community Survey 2019 — US Census Bureau
The US VC Female Founders Dashboard — PitchBook
Startup Early Survival Rate — Kauffman Indicators of Entrepreneurship
State income tax rates — Tax-Rates.org
Local Area Unemployment Statistics — US Bureau of Labor Statistics
Female-founded startups in US set record for capital invested — PitchBook
Featured Free eCommerce Plan 🔥
Get a free website builder, online ordering, gift cards, in-store pick-up options, and dozens of other features for eCommerce and hybrid businesses.


text:
Books Like The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared
Posted on 28th of November, 2020 by Naomi Bolton
There is a trend in fiction for most of the primary characters to be young and healthy, especially in stories that involve action and adventure. This is understandable for genres such as young adult where authors want their target audiences to be able to relate to their characters. However, this often means that older characters are overlooked or relegated to background roles. One novel that bucked this trend is The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared by Jonas Jonasson. It features a protagonist who escapes from his hundredth birthday celebration at his retirement home and ends up embarking on an adventure that sees him on the run from the police and a drug gang. The novel also features flashbacks to his youth, which shows that he already has a penchant for all kinds of misadventures. While there are not a lot of other novels featuring centenarian protagonists here are a few other books like The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared.
The Accidental Further Adventures of the Hundred-Year-Old Man
Nine years after the publication of The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared Jonas Jonasson published the sequel, titled The Accidental Further Adventures of the Hundred-Year-Old Man. It is set after the events of the first book and sees the protagonist, Allan Karlsson, using his newfound wealth to live at a luxury hotel in Bali. However, Allan along with his friend Julius end up having to be rescued by a North Korean ship after a hot-air balloon incident at Allan's 101st birthday celebration. Matters become even more complicated when a suitcase full of contraband uranium enters the picture and the two protagonists become embroiled in a diplomatic crisis. While the book features a more political tone than the first novel, it still has plenty of humorous situations for Allan to navigate.
The Unlikely Pilgrimage of Harold Fry
by Rachel Joyce
The Unlikely Pilgrimage of Harold Fry by Rachel Joyce features a 65-year-old protagonist who receives a letter while cutting the lawn outside his house. The letter is from a colleague of Harold who he has not seen or heard from in twenty years. After reading the upsetting contents of the letter Harold writes her a reply and walks to the corner mailbox to send it away. However, on his way to the mailbox, Harold has a change of heart and decides that he should deliver the message in person. The only catch is that to do so Harold would have to make a six hundred mile journey and he doesn't even have a mobile phone on him, let alone a map or hiking boots. Nevertheless, Harold is convinced that he might just be able to save someone else's life if he simply keeps walking.
Apples Should Be Red
By Penny Watson
Apples Should Be Red is a romantic comedy novella by Penny Watson featuring a cranky 62-year-old protagonist named Tom Jenkins. Tom is politically incorrect, likes to chain-smoke, curses every chance he gets, and doesn't particularly like people, so he's not impressed when he is tasked with holding Thanksgiving. Nevertheless, Tom thinks he can get away with the whole thing by putting in the least amount of effort, but this doesn't sit well with Beverly Anderson, the 59-year old mother of his daughter-in-law. To make matters worse Beverly has to stay over at Tom's place for a few days leading up to Thanksgiving and their opposing personalities cause a lot of friction. The two of them can't even agree on what the color of apples should be, but somewhere in between the battle of wills Tom and Beverly begin to fall for each other.
Like A Mule Bringing Ice Cream To The Sun
by Sarah Ladipo Manyika
Like a Mule Bringing Ice Cream to the Sun by Sarah Ladipo Manyika is the story of Morayo Da Silva. Morayo is a Nigerian lady who is in her seventies living in San Francisco. Although her seventy-fifth birthday is looming Morayo is determined to match the youthful energy of San Francisco, so she still enjoys taking road trips in her vintage Porsche and getting into conversations with strangers. Because Morayo values her health and independence so much it is a shock to her when she loses both due to a fall. Since she doesn't have a family to rely on anymore Morayo has to rely on the friends she has made in San Francisco as well as the chance encounters she has with strangers. It is a new experience for Marayo who has always lived life to the full and causes her to reminisce about all the ups and downs she's had to face over the years.
Lillian Boxfish Takes a Walk
by Kathleen Rooney
Lillian Boxfish Takes a Walk is the second novel by Kathleen Rooney, which she based loosely on the life of Margaret Fishback. The 85-year-old protagonist arrived has been in New York since the 1930s and climbed her way to the top by becoming the world's highest-paid advertising woman. However, she finds herself alone in the city on New Year's Eve of 1984, so she decided to take a 10-mile walk. Along the way she spots a lot of sights and sounds that open up a flood of memories for her and the extraordinary life that she has lived. Lillian also meets a colorful cast of characters during her walk, ranging from children and bartenders to shopkeepers and criminals. The novel is not just a humorous and touching story about Lillian, but also an ode to the city that never sleeps.
Editorial Review: Bay of Devils by Grahame Shannon
Books Like And Then There Were None
Children of the Knight
Michael J. Bowler
Download Read more
Adron J. Smitley - Intriguing Fantasy in an Immersive world
FEATURED AUTHOR - #1 best-selling fantasy author Adron J. Smitley loves and writes fantasy, as well runs an advice blog for writers on everything from plot, character, and story structure. Adron also authored the critically acclaimed 'Punching Babies: a how-to guide' a teaching manual for writers on how to best plot their stories through every essential stage of dramatic conflict. As our Author of the Day, Adron tells us all about Veilfall.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


FYI you guys are great and the tech support is excellant. I am having a problem with Ship Rush in terms of Fed Ex errors and having been talking to tech support. Today I documented as much as I could in terms of errors. Here are my specs and some of what I discovered.
The error I receive is "Fedex Server returned error. Fedex delivery signature options requested is not valid for this shipment A000"
It does not seem to follow any pattern in the four times I personally watched it happen. I am shipping all of our packages as driver release and manually selecting that every time even though it defaults to it. We have found that sometimes we can get them to ship if we switch to signature required. One experiment we did was to close Ship Rush and then restart it after which the package would ship through to Fed Ex as driver release where before it refused it. Any time we add three packages we cant ship at all. We also add handling charges every time which I mention because it was the only thing different I notcied between the time your tech support(while remoted in) tried to ship three packages and succeeded and we tried to ship three packages again later and failed.
The main issue is my shipping department is furious at me because this is erroring out up to ten times a day and then stops for no reason for a few hours. I can not seem to discern any pattern as of yet. I like the software and so do the users, but the errors are trouble. Please help me any way you can tomorrow so I can get this solved.
Also, can you reproduce the error at will ?
IOW, Will a specific shipment (address, service, etc.) always throw this error?
If so, please dial up such a shipment and post a screen shot here to the forum (see the FAQ link above for steps to post a screen shot).
Also NOTE: Some shipments CANNOT be released. For example, COD, hazmat, high declared value, etc. are not release-able.
I will get the exact product version. It was downloaded from your servers last weekend and I know it is version 4. We got the activation code earlier in the week.
I am unable to reproduce the error at will, expect of course when I add three packages to one shipment. That seems almost automatic every time.
Once a package has errored out I am not able to get it to go through unless I use some of the above tactics in my earlier post like shutting the program down, or changing the shipping method to direct signature.
I just got some numbers and data from the shipping department while making this post. Out of 21 packages they sent they recieved two errors this morning and both times the shipping manager closed the program and then reopened it and then it worked fine.
In addition we ship no hazardous material etc or anything of great value either. In fact the value section is left blank.
I will be keeping an eye on the board today so please help me in any way you can. Even Fedex's IT person said your product looked very good and should be a nice fit for the company. I just have to get the errors fixed.
The next time the error happens, please drag the error msg down (so we can see the whole SR screen) and take a screen shot so we can see the whole SR screen and the error message.
"C:\Documents and Settings\<YOUR NAME>\Application Data\z-firm llc\ShipRush v4\Logging Info"
Note that \Application Data\ is HIDDEN, turn on View Hidden in explorer to see it.
I am on my way out now to the client and they are instructed to capture the next error on printscreen. I will contact all of you when I get there and then forward all the material and let you know I did so.
I have forwarded all the information to Support. We are now fairly sure that when a single package fails, stoping the application and then restarting it seems to work, but cause the user to loose all information of course.
We have the information. Engineering will look the data over. I do not have an ETA for this issue.
Based on the data you sent us, this error is happening when you select the Estimate Cost option, correct?
Here is the information regarding the estimate cost function and how we use it. Once we have all the information keyed into the application we use the estimate cost function. Oddly enough sometimes it will show a number next to it, but most times we have to go to list services to see the estiamted cost. We need this information to run the credti card to bill the client for shipping. The application DOES NOT fail when we use this feature. After we use this we close the window and then click SHIP. That is when we get the errors that I sent to you. In other words the application is perfectly stable and operational until we hit SHIP. Of course as I stated before this error is intermittent and I cant seem to reproduce it.
Thank you for the log info, screen shots, etc.
We have done quite a bit of work on this, and have had to pull in FedEx as well.
Please clarify what you click on to see the error.
Only when I press ship. The estimating costs section seems to work flawlessly.
Thank you very much for your patience while we dug into this.
OK, we are starting to get a clue. If anything below is out of line let us know.
"Fedex Server returned error. Fedex delivery signature options requested is not valid for this shipment A000"
Not all signature options are available with all shipment types. Your shipment is dialed up with an unavailable combination of shipment options.
Select Indirect Signature Required on all your FedEx Ground shipments and this problem will go away.
FedEx introduced new signature services over the summer.
Your shipment is dialed up for 'No Signature' (aka signature release) -- This is what we see on the screen shots you sent us.
Don't ask us...., we don't make the rules (sorry).
and Adult Signature are available as an upgrade for U.S.
Now there is part of the ShipRush UI that is confusing, and we will fix it: The ShipRush UI let's you select No Signature for a Ground -> Commercial shipment, and some of the functions work when you do this. Heck, you can even ship. But the shipment goes through as Indirect Signature because that is the only kind of basic service there is for this shipment.
The error message is correct, but it is intermittent so it is misleading and confusing. Z-Firm code is preventing the error message most of the time by 'just doing the right thing' behind the scenes for you. But you have found some steps (accidentally) that cause the error to surface.
But the error is simply as it is stated: The dialed up shipment is not allowed as such. Select Indirect Signature (which is what you are actually getting anyway) and all will be well.
And Z-Firm will clean up this experience in the ShipRush software.
Thank you again for your patience, persistence, and understanding on this.
-FedEx Ground to commercial addresses"
"The error message is correct, but it is intermittent so it is misleading and confusing. Z-Firm code is preventing the error message most of the time by 'just doing the right thing' behind the scenes for you. But you have found some steps (accidentally) that cause the error to surface."
But the error is simply as it is stated: The dialed up shipment is not allowed as such. Select Indirect Signature (which is what you are actually getting anyway) and all will be well."
So this is why the software performs as such. In other words if they select Indirect Signature every time then the problem ends.
I will talk to the shipping manager and go over this with her and then will test this out. Please respond back to let me know if I understand this correctly.
(In researching this, I was incredulous that there is no such thing as signature release for Ground to commercial addresses.... I called 1-800-GO-FEDEX to do a reality check... and they confirmed it.


text:
Tag: abuse of dominant position
Posted on 12 May 2016 13 May 2016
Is Google abusing its dominant market position?
In April 2015 the European Commission (EC) opened a formal investigation into the behaviour of Google in the market for smartphones and tablets. On the 20th April Google was sent a preliminary judgment (referred to formally as a Statement of Objections) in which it was accused of abusing its dominant market position. The European Commissioner argued that the case was similar to the famous and protracted investigation into the conduct of Microsoft.
In the early 2000s Microsoft had a dominant position in the market for desktop operating systems. It has been estimated that 97% of all computing devices at the time used Microsoft Windows. This market power attracted the attention of the EC who accused the company of using its dominance in the operating systems market to restrict competition in complementary markets for software such internet browsers and media players. This led to a complex legal battle between the two parties.
Windows is proprietory software and computer manufacturers have to pay Microsoft a licence fee to install it on their machines. Before the rulings by the EC, Microsoft could make a licence for Windows conditional on other Microsoft software such as Internet Explorer and Media Player being pre-installed. This is known as bundling and in this case the EC came to the conclusion that it restricted competition. The European Commissioner, Margrethe Vestager recently stated that
"If Microsoft's media player was already there when you bought a PC, it would be hard to persuade people to even try an alternative, so innovators would be at a big disadvantage"
Microsoft lost most of its competition battles with the EC and had to pay a total of €2.2 billion in various fines. It was also forced to change its conduct. For example, the EC instructed Microsoft to provide its users with a choice of internet browsers.
The marketplace for operating systems has gone through some significant changes since the early 2000s. By 2016 Microsoft's market share had fallen to 26 per cent. One of the major reasons for this decline has been the increasing popularity of smartphones and tablets.
Google's Android operating system dominates the mobile market with a market share of over 80 per cent. However, the economics of the Android operating system are very different from those of Windows. Unlike Windows, Android is an example of 'open-source software'. This means that, rather than having to obtain a licence fee, mobile handset or tablet manufacturers can freely install Android on their devices and are not obliged to pre-install other Google software – both Amazon and Nokia have done this. ,
Another major difference is that it is relatively straightforward for rival firms to develop software that can run on Android. Microsoft was accused of making it very difficult for rival software companies to develop products that would run smoothly on the Windows operating system.
It would appear far easier for rival firms to compete with Google than it ever was with Microsoft when it had a dominant market position. It might therefore seem surprising that the EC has accused Google of abusing its dominant market position.
Rather than any restrictions surrounding the licencing conditions for the operating system the EC's objections to Google's behaviour focus on its licencing conditions for other proprietary software products it provides. In particular, the EC has focused on the Google Play Store.
The pre-installation of the Google Play Store is seen as vital to the commercial success of any Android phone. Google Play Store was launched in 2012 and brought three previously separate services together – Android Market, Google Music and Google eBookstore. It is the official app store for all users of a device with an Android operating system. It has been argued that a mobile phone store would not stock an Android phone unless it had Google Play Store pre-installed because it is so highly valued by customers.
Therefore it is vital for Android smartphone and tablet manufacturers to obtain a licence for the Play Store. The conditions for obtaining a licence are outlined in the Mobile Application Distribution Agreement. This specifies that a number of other Google apps must also be pre-installed on the device in order for a licence to be granted for the Play Store. These apps include Gmail, Google Chrome, Google Drive, Google Hangouts, Google Maps, Google Search and YouTube. The manufacturer is free to install any other non-google apps.
The EC has specifically objected to the condition that Google Search has to be installed and set as the default search engine. It is concerned that this that will make it very difficult for other search services to compete with Google because (1) manufacturers will have limited incentives to pre-install any competing search engines and (2) consumers will have less incentive to download competing search engines.
The EC has also expressed concerns that the pre-installation of Google Chrome as the mobile browser will also have a negative impact on competition and innovation in this market.
Companies are given 12 weeks to respond after they have received a preliminary judgment. If they do not accept the objections, then the EC will take several months to come to a final ruling and suggest some appropriate remedies. In this case, the most likely remedy is the removal of the licence conditions for the Google Play Store. If Google appeals the ECs decision to the General Court of the EU, it could take years until a final judgment is made.
Murad Ahmed, the European Technology Correspondent at the Financial Times commented that
"One lesson Google might want to learn from Microsoft's example is while it fights the EU watchdog it is not overtaken by a less distracted competitor."
Europe v Google: how Android became a battleground The Guardian (20/4/16)
EU accuses Google of using Android to skew market against rivals The Guardian (20/4/16)
Google faces EU charge over Android 'abuse of dominance' BBC News (20/4/16)
Google hit with EU competition charges for 'abusing' dominant position with Android Independent (20/4/16)
Everything you need to know about Google and its EU battle The Telegraph (20/4/16)
Draw a diagram to compare and contrast the price and quantity in a competitive market with a situation where a firm has market dominance. Clearly state any assumptions you have made in the analysis.
What factors does the EC consider when judging if a firm has a dominant position in the market?
This blog has focused on one aspect of Google's behaviour/conduct that has raised concerns with the EC. What other elements of Google's conduct has the European Commission objected to?
Explain the difference between pure and mixed bundling.
What impact does bundling have on consumer welfare?
Tags: Tagsabuse of dominant position, bundling, competition commission, EU competition policy, market dominance, mixed bundling, pure bundlingPosted in: CategoriesEconomics 10e: Ch 07, Economics 10e: Ch 08, Economics 10e: Ch 14, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 11, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 12, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 21, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 07, Essentials of Economics: 8e Ch 08Authored by: JonGuest
Posted on 8 August 2014 9 August 2014
BT takes on Sky in the sports broadcasting market
With the new Premier League football season only a week away, TV companies are heavily advertising the matches they will be showing. Until recently, BSkyB, having seen off competition from Setanta and ESPN, appeared to have an untouchable position in this market. However, competition now appears to be intensifying.
BT entered the market in 2012 by paying £738m for the rights to screen 38 Premier League matches a season for 3 seasons, with Sky showing another 116 matches. BT is clearly heavily backing its sports coverage with an initial outlay of £1.5b and them continuing to sign up high profile presenters and ambassadors including former players and a current manager.
Furthermore, BT dealt Sky (and ITV) a hefty blow last year when it outbid them to win the rights to exclusively show European club competition matches from 2015. Sky responded by saying that:
We bid with a clear view of what the rights are worth to us. It seems BT chose to pay far in excess of our valuation
If true, this would illustrate the winner's curse which can arise in auctions. However, John Petter, chief executive of BT Retail, said that the deal demonstrated that BT Sport was committed to establishing itself in this market and countered Sky's suggestion that they had overpaid by saying:
They would say that, wouldn't they? Secretly, I'd expect them to be kicking themselves and full of regrets this morning
Clearly important to BT's strategy is bundling its sports coverage in for free with their broadband packages. This is not without controversy since, at the same time as spending vast amounts of money to setup its sports coverage, BT is receiving large government subsidies to improve rural broadband provision.
An important forthcoming ruling from the Competition Appeal Tribunal will have a significant effect on how competition between BT and Sky develops. In this case Sky is accused of abusing its dominant position by refusing to supply BT's YouView service with its sports channels at a reasonable wholesale price and could now be forced to do so.
It will also be fascinating to see how BT Sport's strategy develops over time. BT is unlikely to continue to provide all its coverage for free once it includes the European matches that it has won the rights to show at great expense. It will also be fascinating to see the extent to which it continues to have success in winning broadcasting rights in the future.
Competition will inevitably push up the amount that the Premier League raises in the next rights auction. Current predictions are that these will be sold for over £4bn, up from £3bn in the previous auction. This will increase the amount the Premier League clubs receive and is also likely to further push up player wages. It remains to be seen the extent to which this will benefit viewers, not to mention pubs wishing to show the games some of whom have in the past looked for alternative solutions because of the high prices they have to pay.
BT wins court battle forcing review of Sky wholesale pricing decision The Guardian, Mark Sweney (17/02/14)
BT Sport does little to lift BT TV homes informitv – connected vision (01/08/14)
BT Sport continues to invest in football line-up MediaWeek, Arif Durrani (29/07/14)
What are the key characteristics of the market for sports broadcasting rights?
What are the pros and cons for consumers of BT Sport's emergence?
How do you think Sky might respond to competition from BT Sport?
How do you think BT Sport's strategy might develop over time?
Tags: Tagsabuse of dominant position, broadband, bundling, entry, football, market dominance, strategy, winner's cursePosted in: CategoriesEconomics 10e: Ch 07, Economics 10e: Ch 08, Economics 10e: Ch 14, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 11, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 12, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 14, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 17, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 21, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 05, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 06, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 09, Essentials of Economics: 8e Ch 06, Essentials of Economics: 8e Ch 08Authored by: Matt Olczak
Posted on 15 March 2013 23 March 2013
Microsoft breaks promise to the European Commission
Since the late 1990s the European Commission (EC) has been concerned with trying to prevent Microsoft from abusing its dominant position. As described previously on this site, in the latest instalment last week Microsoft was fined for accidentally failing to adhere to an earlier commitment automatically to allow Windows users a choice of web browser.
This is the first case of fines being imposed for failure to comply with commitments required by the EC. In part because of Microsoft's compliance, the fine imposed was well below the maximum level it could have been. However, it still means that Microsoft has now in total contributed enough to the EC's coffers to cover the competition department's budget for over 20 years.
Commitments appear to be increasingly the EC's preferred solution for resolving competition disputes, especially in the rapidly changing IT sector (see for example Google and e-books). In contrast to a lengthy litigation process, in theory such commitments can quickly fix the problem and increase competition. The EC hopes that the fine imposed on Microsoft will send clear signals to firms that agreed upon commitments must be adhered to. However, this case also highlights that behavioural commitments require close monitoring by the competition authorities. As one industry consultant argues:
While it's highly likely that it was a technical mistake that broke the browser choice facility the fact that it remained broken for 14 months raises significant questions about Microsoft's ability and willingness to comply with the voluntary agreement with the EU.
At the same time the situation also raises concerns over the EU's ability to actually monitor the outcomes of antitrust agreements.
Microsoft offers web browser choice to IE users BBC News (19/02/10)
Microsoft faces hefty EU fine The Guardian (06/03/13)
Microsoft fined €561m for 'browser choice' error The Guardian, Charles Arthur (06/03/13)
Why is it essential that competition disputes in the IT sector are quickly resolved?
What are the problems with monitoring company behaviour in this sector?
What are the pros and cons of agreeing commitments rather than litigation for competition law infringements?
How might Microsoft respond to this latest fine from the EC?
Tags: Tagsabuse of dominant position, browser market, e-books, EU competition policy, Google, MicrosoftPosted in: CategoriesEconomics 10e: Ch 14, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 21, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 09, Essentials of Economics: 8e Ch 08Authored by: Matt Olczak
Not in the Window
In 2009, the European Commission investigated Microsoft's practice of bundling its own browser, Internet Explorer, with new copies of Windows. It found that this was an abuse of market power and created an unfair barrier to entry of other browsers, such as Firefox.
An agreement was reached that Microsoft would include a 'choice screen' in which users in the EU would be given a full list of alternative browsers and asked which they would like to install. On making their selection, a link would take them to the browser site to download the installation program. This screen would be available until 2014. Between March 2010, when the choice screen was first provided and November of the same year, 84 million browsers were downloaded through it.
In May 2011, however, the screen was no longer present on new Windows 7 purchases. The Commission took some time to realise this: indeed it was Microsoft's rivals that pointed it out. The screen reappeared some 13 months later, after some 15m copies of Windows software had been sold.
For this lapse, the Commission has just fined Microsoft €561m. Commission Vice President in charge of competition policy, Joaquín Almunia, said:
In 2009, we closed our investigation about a suspected abuse of dominant position by Microsoft due to the tying of Internet Explorer to Windows by accepting commitments offered by the company. Legally binding commitments reached in antitrust decisions play a very important role in our enforcement policy because they allow for rapid solutions to competition problems. Of course, such decisions require strict compliance. A failure to comply is a very serious infringement that must be sanctioned accordingly.
This may seem unduly harsh, given that Internet Explorer's share of the browser market has fallen dramatically. In 2009, it had around 50% of the European market, with its main rival at the time, Mozilla's Firefox, having just under 40%. By 2013, Internet Explorer's share has fallen to around 24% and Firefox's to around 29%. Google's Chrome, which was just starting up in 2009, has seen its share of the European market rise to around 35% and is now the market leader. Partly this is due to the rise in tablets and smartphones, a large proportion of which use Google's Android operating system and the Chrome browser.
Not surprisingly, the European Commission is investigating Google to see whether it is abusing a dominant position. Is Google's case, it's not just about its share of the browser market, it's more about its share of the search market, which in the EU is around 90% (compared with around 65% in the USA). As The Economist article below states:
The Commissioner believes that Google may be favouring its own specialised services (eg, for flights or hotels) at rivals' expense; that its deals with publishers may unfairly exclude competitors; and that it prevents advertisers from taking their data elsewhere.
Joaquín Almunia asked Google to respond to these concerns by January 31. Google delivered its suggestions on the deadline, but we await to hear precisely what it said and how the Commission will respond. It is understood that Google's proposal is for clearly labelling its own products on its search engine.
Microsoft Fined $732 Million By EU Over Browser eWeek, Michelle Maisto (6/3/13)
Microsoft faces hefty EU fine The Guardian (6/3/13)
Sin of omission The Economist (9/3/13)
Microsoft fined by European Commission over web browser BBC News (6/3/13)
EU commissioner Joaquin Almunia announces Microsoft fine BBC News (6/3/13)
Microsoft's European Fine Comes in an Era of Browser Diversity Forbes, J.P. Gownder (6/3/13)
Life after Firefox: Can Mozilla regain its mojo? BBC News, Dave Lee (11/4/12)
Google responds to European commission's antitrust chief The Guardian, Charles Arthur (31/1/13)
Google May Clinch EU Settlement After 'Summer,' Almunia Says Bloomberg Businessweek, Stephanie Bodoni and Aoife White (22/2/13)
European Commission Press Release
Antitrust: Commission fines Microsoft for non-compliance with browser choice commitments Europa (6/3/13)
Why did Microsoft's share of the browser market continue to decline between May 2011 and June 2012?
Why would it matter if Microsoft had market power in the browser market, given that it's free for anyone to download a browser?
In what ways might Google be abusing a dominant position in the market?
Can Mozilla regain its mojo?
According to the second Guardian article, the Microsoft-backed lobby group Icomp said "To be seen as a success, any settlement must … include specific measures to restore competition and allow other parties to compete effectively on a level playing field with Google in the key markets of search and search advertising." Give examples of such measures and assess how successful they might be.
Would "clearly labelling its own products on its search engine" be enough to ensure adequate competition?
Tags: Tagsabuse of dominant position, browser market, competition, competition policy, dominant position, EU competition policy, market power, monopoly power, oligopoly, public interest, search engine marketPosted in: CategoriesEconomics 10e: Ch 08, Economics 10e: Ch 14, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 12, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 14, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 15, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 21, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 23, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 05, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 07, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 09, Essentials of Economics: 8e Ch 06, Essentials of Economics: 8e Ch 08Authored by: John Sloman
Posted on 31 March 2011 26 April 2011
Microsoft versus Google
There has been an ongoing battle between Microsoft and Google for many years in the technology industry. Microsoft have received many fines in countless anti-trust cases, but Microsoft has now taken the upper hand in the most recent development, after filing its first official complaint with the regulators against Google. Microsoft is claiming that Google's actions are restricting competition in the market and thereby abusing its dominant position. This complaint follows numerous complaints by small businesses. Microsoft's Brad Smith said that they had been forced to act because of a:
"broadening pattern of conduct aimed at stopping anyone else from creating a competitive alternative".
Google controls approximately 95% of the European search engine market and complaints have focused on actions that Google have taken to restrict competition, further its dominance in the market and thereby harm consumers. The European Commission is already investigating Google and will continue to discuss the case with all parties involved.
Microsoft takes on Google with antitrust complaint Guardian, Mark Sweney (31/3/11)
Minnow Microsoft v the Google giant BBC News Blog, Rory Cellan-Jones (31/3/11)
Adding our voice to concerns about search in Europe Microsoft Blog, Brad Smith (30/3/11)
Microsoft accuses Google of antitrust violations CNN Money, David Goldman (31/3/11)
What constitutes a dominant position? In what forms can a firm abuse its dominant position?
What is the purpose of anti-trust laws and competition policy?
To what extent are Google's actions against consumer's interests?
What anti-competitive practices have Google been accused of? Explain how each is against consumer's interests and against the interests of its competitors.
What are (a) the arguments for keeping interest rates at 0.5% and (b) the arguments for raising interest rates? Who wins and loses in each case?
Tags: Tagsabuse of dominant position, anti-competitive practices, anti-trust, competition policy, dominant position, european commission, Google, Microsoft, regulationPosted in: CategoriesEconomics 10e: Ch 14, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 21, Economics for Business: 8e Ch 23, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 06, Essential Economics for Business: Ch 07, Essentials of Economics: 8e Ch 06Authored by: Elizabeth Jones


Woodridge had a population of 12,787 at the 2011 census. The Woodridge railway station is part of the Queensland Rail City network and located within the connecting Logan Central business district. Woodridge is a suburb of Logan City in the South East of Queensland, Australia. It is in Zone 5 of the TransLink integrated public transport system. Trinder Park railway station also provides access to regular Queensland Rail City network services to Brisbane and Beenleigh.


text:
By 97.1FM The Drive | March 15, 2022
New Whitney Houston special to air next month
Kevin Winter/Getty Images
A new Whitney Houston special is coming next month.
Whitney, A Look Back is set to April 2, the night before the Grammys. The special, chronicling her life and career, will include rare and never-before-seen footage from Entertainment Tonight's "vault."
The special will also feature interviews with those closest to Whitney, including Dionne Warwick, Clive Davis, CeCe Winans, Monica and Kelly Price, as well as explore new details about the days leading up to and following her tragic passing 10 years ago at age 48.
Whitney, A Look Back will air Saturday, April 2, at 8 p.m. ET/PT on CBS.