Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. (NYSE:HOT) today reported fourth quarter 2015 financial results.
Excluding special items, EPS from continuing operations was $0.89. Including special items, EPS from continuing operations was $0.98.
Adjusted EBITDA was $318 million.
Excluding special items, income from continuing operations was $151 million. Including special items, income from continuing operations was $166 million.
Worldwide Systemwide REVPAR for Same-Store Hotels increased 2.8% in constant dollars (decreased 1.1% in actual dollars) compared to 2014. Systemwide REVPAR for Same-Store Hotels in North America increased 4.7% in constant dollars (increased 3.3% in actual dollars).
Management fees, franchise fees and other income decreased 2.0% compared to 2014. Core fees were flat compared to 2014.
Earnings from Starwood's vacation ownership and residential business decreased approximately $14 million compared to 2014.
During the quarter, the Company signed 79 hotel management and franchise contracts, representing approximately 16,800 rooms and opened 37 hotels and resorts with approximately 9,600 rooms.
During the quarter, the Company paid a quarterly dividend of $0.375 per share and repurchased 0.6 million shares at a total cost of $43 million and a weighted average price of $70.44 per share.
On October 27, 2015, the Company entered into definitive agreements with Interval Leisure Group, Inc. ("ILG") pursuant to which the Company's vacation ownership business will be distributed on a pro rata basis to stockholders and immediately after will merge with a wholly-owned subsidiary of ILG, subject to customary closing conditions.
On November 15, 2015, the Company entered into a definitive merger agreement with Marriott International, Inc. ("Marriott"), pursuant to which the Company agreed to be acquired by Marriott, subject to customary closing conditions, creating the world's largest hotel company.
Excluding special items, EPS from continuing operations was $3.11. Including special items, EPS from continuing operations was $2.88.
Adjusted EBITDA was $1.197 billion.
Excluding special items, income from continuing operations was $529 million. Including special items, income from continuing operations was $489 million.
Worldwide Systemwide REVPAR for Same-Store Hotels increased 4.1% in constant dollars (decreased 0.4% in actual dollars) compared to 2014. Systemwide REVPAR for Same-Store Hotels in North America increased 5.4% in constant dollars (increased 4.1% in actual dollars).
Management fees, franchise fees and other income decreased 0.9% compared to 2014. Core fees increased 0.6% compared to 2014.
Earnings from Starwood's vacation ownership and residential business decreased approximately $4 million compared to 2014.
During the year, the Company signed 220 hotel management and franchise contracts, representing approximately 45,800 rooms, and opened 105 hotels and resorts with approximately 21,500 rooms.
During the year, the Company returned approximately $626 million to stockholders through share repurchases and dividends.
During the year, the Company received gross cash proceeds from asset sales of approximately $822 million.
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. ("Starwood" or the "Company") today reported EPS from continuing operations for the fourth quarter of 2015 of $0.98 compared to $1.40 in the fourth quarter of 2014. Excluding special items, EPS from continuing operations was $0.89 for the year ended quarter of 2015 compared to $0.97 in the fourth quarter of 2014.
Special items in the fourth quarter of 2015 consisted primarily of restructuring and other special charges of $37 million ($22 million after-tax) partially offset by a gain on a property insurance settlement of $36 million (before and after-tax). Special items in the fourth quarter of 2014 totaled a benefit of $74 million (after-tax). Excluding special items, the effective income tax rate in the fourth quarter of 2015 was 29.3% compared to 24.5% in the fourth quarter of 2014.
Income from continuing operations was $166 million in the fourth quarter of 2015, compared to $245 million in the fourth quarter of 2014. Excluding special items, income from continuing operations was $151 million in the fourth quarter of 2015 compared to $171 million in the fourth quarter of 2014. The decline in income from continuing operations primarily reflects the impact of hotel sales in 2014 and 2015.
Net income was $166 million and $0.98 per share in the fourth quarter of 2015, compared to $234 million and $1.33 per share in the fourth quarter of 2014.
Thomas Mangas, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, said, "We had good momentum in our business through the year, with REVPAR index gains in each of our six global regions and a record-breaking year of growth where we signed more new deals and opened more hotels than in any single year in Starwood's entire history, increasing our net rooms growth to 4.4%. As we prepare for the merger with Marriott, our priorities in 2016 will build on this success - accelerating our growth, developing our talent, innovating across our brands, and delighting our guests to grow our REVPAR faster than the competition and deliver superior returns to our owners. While 2015 was clearly a year of change for Starwood given our announced merger with Marriott, our strategy remains very much intact and on track."
Income from continuing operations was $489 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $643 million in 2014. Excluding special items, income from continuing operations was $529 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $561 million in 2014. The decline in income from continuing operations primarily reflects the impact of hotel sales in 2014 and 2015.
Net income was $489 million and $2.88 per share for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $633 million and $3.40 per share in 2014.
Adjusted EBITDA was $1.197 billion for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $1.238 billion in 2014.
Worldwide Systemwide REVPAR for Same-Store Hotels increased 2.8% in constant dollars (decreased 1.1% in actual dollars) compared to the fourth quarter of 2014. International Systemwide REVPAR for Same-Store Hotels increased 0.6% in constant dollars (decreased 6.1% in actual dollars).
Worldwide Same-Store Company-Operated gross operating profit margins decreased approximately 15 basis points compared to 2014. International gross operating profit margins for Same-Store Company-Operated properties decreased approximately 60 basis points. North American Same-Store Company-Operated gross operating profit margins increased approximately 50 basis points.
Management fees, franchise fees and other income were $288 million, down $6 million, or 2.0% compared to the fourth quarter of 2014. Core fees remained flat at $225 million. Other management and franchise revenues decreased 12.7% or $8 million, primarily due to fees associated with the termination of certain management and franchise contracts in 2014.
During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company signed 79 hotel management and franchise contracts, representing approximately 16,800 rooms, of which 59 are new builds and 20 are conversions from other brands. At December 31, 2015, the Company had approximately 530 hotels in the active pipeline representing approximately 116,000 rooms.
During the fourth quarter of 2015, 37 new hotels and resorts (representing approximately 9,600 rooms) entered the system, including the SLS Las Vegas, a Tribute Portfolio Resort (Nevada, 1,623 rooms), The St. Regis Macao, Cotai Central (Macau, 400 rooms), The Westin Denver International Airport (Colorado, 519 rooms), Sheraton Zhuhai Hotel (China, 544 rooms), and Aloft Louisville Downtown (Kentucky, 175 rooms). During the quarter, 11 properties (representing approximately 2,300 rooms) were removed from the system.
Worldwide REVPAR at Starwood Same-Store Owned Hotels increased 6.3% in constant dollars (increased 0.8% in actual dollars) when compared to 2014. REVPAR at Starwood Same-Store Owned Hotels in North America increased 6.7% in constant dollars (increased 2.7% in actual dollars). Internationally, Starwood Same-Store Owned Hotel REVPAR increased 5.8% in constant dollars (decreased 1.8% in actual dollars).
Revenues at Starwood Same-Store Owned Hotels Worldwide increased 6.7% in constant dollars (increased 1.0% in actual dollars) while costs and expenses increased 4.6% in constant dollars (decreased 1.2% in actual dollars) when compared to 2014. Margins at these hotels increased approximately 170 basis points compared to 2014.
Revenues at Starwood Same-Store Owned Hotels in North America increased 7.2% in constant dollars (increased 3.0% in actual dollars) while costs and expenses increased 5.6% in constant dollars (increased 1.6% in actual dollars) when compared to 2014. Margins at these hotels increased approximately 110 basis points compared to 2014.
Internationally, revenues at Starwood Same-Store Owned Hotels increased 6.1% in constant dollars (decreased 1.8% in actual dollars) while costs and expenses increased 3.2% in constant dollars (decreased 5.0% in actual dollars) when compared to 2014. Margins at these hotels increased approximately 250 basis points compared to 2014.
Revenues at Owned Hotels, which were negatively impacted by asset sales in 2015, were $309 million, compared to $370 million in 2014. Expenses at Owned Hotels were $237 million compared to $288 million in 2014.
Vacation ownership and residential revenues for the three months ended December 31, 2015 decreased 7.6%, to $157 million, compared to the corresponding period in 2014 primarily due to the timing of deferred revenues. Originated contract sales of vacation ownership intervals increased 26.3% for the three months ended December 31, 2015, compared to the corresponding period in 2014, primarily driven by the launch of the new Sheraton Flex product as well as sales at the Westin Nanea Ocean Villas. The number of contracts signed increased 10.1%, and the average price per vacation ownership unit sold increased 13.0% to approximately $15,800.
During the fourth quarter of 2015, selling, general, administrative and other expenses ("SG&A") decreased 11.9% to $96 million compared to $109 million in 2014, primarily due to various cost savings initiatives. For the full year 2015, SG&A decreased 3.5% to $388 million compared to $402 million in 2014.
Gross capital spending during the quarter included approximately $56 million of maintenance capital and $60 million of development capital.
In 2015, the Company received gross cash proceeds from asset sales of approximately $822 million. On February 15, 2016, the Company completed the sale of the Hotel Imperial, A Luxury Collection Hotel, Vienna, for gross cash proceeds of approximately $79 million, subject to a long-term management agreement.
During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company recorded a $3 million restructuring charge primarily related to the Company's previously announced cost savings initiatives. The Company also recorded $34 million of other special charges primarily consisting of $10 million in costs associated with the planned ILG transaction as well as $17 million in costs associated with the Company's review of strategic alternatives, which culminated in Marriott's proposed acquisition of the Company.
On November 5, 2015, the Company declared a regular quarterly dividend of $0.375 per share, which was paid on December 23, 2015 to stockholders of record as of December 9, 2015. The total dividends paid in the fourth quarter of 2015 were approximately $63 million. For the full year 2015, the Company has paid approximately $255 million in total dividends.
In the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company repurchased 0.6 million shares at a total cost of approximately $43 million and a weighted average price of $70.44 per share. As of December 31, 2015, approximately $458 million remained available under the Company's share repurchase authorization. For the full year 2015, the Company has repurchased 4.7 million shares at a total cost of $371 million and an average price of $78.39.
At December 31, 2015, the Company had gross debt of $2.2 billion, cash and cash equivalents of $1.1 billion (including $50 million of restricted cash) and net debt of $1.1 billion, compared to net debt of $1.7 billion as of December 31, 2014, in each case excluding debt and restricted cash associated with securitized vacation ownership notes receivable. Net debt at December 31, 2015, including $172 million of debt and $8 million of restricted cash associated with securitized vacation ownership notes receivable, was $1.3 billion.
On October 27, 2015, the Company entered into definitive agreements with ILG, pursuant to which the Company's vacation ownership business will be distributed on a pro rata basis to its stockholders and immediately after will merge with a wholly-owned subsidiary of ILG. In addition, the Company will transfer five hotels to ILG. When the merger is completed, the Company's stockholders will own approximately 55% of the outstanding shares of ILG on a fully-diluted basis and the existing stockholders of ILG will own approximately 45% of ILG on a fully-diluted basis. The transactions are expected to qualify as tax-free transactions to the Company's stockholders and are subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory and ILG stockholder approvals. The transactions will not require a vote of the Company's stockholders and, assuming satisfaction of all required conditions, the parties expect the transactions to close in the second quarter of 2016.
On November 15, 2015, the Company entered into a definitive merger agreement with Marriott, pursuant to which the Company agreed to be acquired by Marriott. At closing, the Company's stockholders will receive 0.92 shares of Marriott common stock and $2.00 in cash for each share of the Company's common stock. On a pro forma basis, the Company's stockholders will own approximately 39% of the combined company's common stock after the completion of the merger. The Company's stockholders will separately receive consideration from the spin-off of the Company's vacation ownership business and subsequent merger with ILG. Following the closing, Marriott's Board of Directors will increase from 11 to 14 members with the expected addition of three members of the Company's Board of Directors.
The transaction is subject to Marriott and the Company's stockholder approvals, completion of the Company's planned disposition of its vacation ownership business, regulatory approvals and the satisfaction of other customary closing conditions. Assuming satisfaction of all required conditions, the parties expect the transaction to close in mid-2016.
The following outlook assumes the planned spin-off of the vacation ownership business and subsequent merger with ILG occurs on April 1, 2016. Transaction costs related to the planned ILG and Marriott transactions are not included in full year SG&A guidance. In 2016, the Company expects to incur transaction costs of approximately $75 million related to the ILG and Marriott transactions.
Adjusted EBITDA is expected to be approximately $1.085 billion to $1.110 billion (based on the assumptions below).
REVPAR at Same-Store Systemwide Hotels Worldwide is expected to be up 2% to 4% in constant dollars (approximately 150 basis points lower in actual dollars at current exchange rates).
REVPAR at Same-Store Owned Hotels Worldwide is expected to be up 1% to 3% in constant dollars (approximately 150 basis points lower in actual dollars at current exchange rates).
Margins at Same-Store Owned Hotels Worldwide are expected to increase 50 to 100 basis points.
Core fees are expected to increase approximately 5.5% to 7.5%.
Management fees, franchise fees and other income are expected to increase approximately 6% to 8%, including approximately $30 million related to nine months of license fees from the vacation ownership business following the expected ILG transaction, offset by an $8 million reduction to deferred gains resulting from gains from a previously sold hotel with a long term management contract being fully amortized.
Earnings from the Company's vacation ownership and residential business of approximately $40 million to $45 million, consisting of approximately $35 million of vacation ownership earnings in the first quarter of 2016 and approximately $5 million to $10 million of residential earnings.
SG&A is expected to be flat to down 2%.
Shifts in exchange rates since 2015 will negatively impact full year earnings by approximately $17 million if exchange rates stay at current levels.
Owned earnings are negatively impacted by approximately $38 million due to asset sales completed in 2015, with additional negative impact of approximately $20 million expected due to lost earnings from the five hotels to be transferred to ILG in connection with the ILG transaction.
Depreciation and amortization is expected to be approximately $280 million.
Interest expense is expected to be approximately $120 million.
Full year effective tax rate is expected to be approximately 32.5%, and cash taxes from operating earnings are expected to be approximately $175 million.
EPS before special items is expected to be approximately $2.74 to $2.84 (based on the assumptions above).
Cash flow from operations is expected to be approximately $800 million to $900 million (based on the assumptions above). Cash flow from operations includes the expected investment in vacation ownership inventory of $55 million (for the first quarter of 2016 only).
Full year capital expenditures (excluding vacation ownership inventory) are expected to be approximately $200 million for maintenance, renovation and technology. In addition, in-flight investment projects and prior commitments for joint ventures and other investments are expected to total approximately $100 million.
Adjusted EBITDA is expected to be approximately $250 million to $260 million (based on the assumptions below).
REVPAR at Same-Store Systemwide Hotels Worldwide is expected to be flat to up 2% in constant dollars (approximately 250 basis points lower in actual dollars at current exchange rates).
REVPAR at Same-Store Owned Hotels Worldwide is expected to be up 2% to 4% in constant dollars (approximately 300 basis points lower in actual dollars at current exchange rates).
Core fees are expected to increase approximately 2% to 4%.
Management fees, franchise fees and other income are expected to increase approximately 5% to 7%.
Owned earnings are negatively impacted by approximately $19 million due to asset sales completed in 2015.
Earnings from the Company's vacation ownership and residential business are expected to be approximately $35 million to $40 million.
EPS is expected to be approximately $0.56 to $0.59 (based on the assumptions above).
The Company's special items included a pre-tax charge of $6 million ($15 million benefit after-tax) in the fourth quarter of 2015 compared to a pre-tax benefit of $23 million ($74 million after-tax) in the same period of 2014.
a) During the three months ended December 31, 2015, the net charge primarily relates to $17 million in costs associated with the Company's review of strategic alternatives which culminated in the proposed Marriott transaction, $10 million in costs associated with the planned ILG transaction, $5 million in costs related to the departure of the Company's Interim CEO, and $2 million in costs associated with the Company's previously announced cost savings initiatives. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the net charge further includes $26 million in costs associated with the planned ILG transaction, $15 million in severance costs, $15 million in costs associated with the Company's previously announced cost savings initiatives, a $6 million charge for technology-related costs and expenses that the Company no longer deems recoverable, partially offset by the reversal of an $8 million reserve as a result of the favorable resolution of a funding commitment associated with a vacation ownership project. During the year ended December 31, 2014, the net credit relates to a reversal of a reserve associated with a $3 million note receivable from a previous disposition.
b) During the three months ended December 31, 2015, the net credit primarily relates to a $36 million property insurance settlement associated with a hotel damaged by a hurricane, partially offset by the impairment of an owned hotel of $3 million. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the net charge further includes a charge relating to the impairment of an owned hotel of $31 million and a $15 million charge related to an obligation associated with a previous disposition, partially offset by a benefit of approximately $20 million associated with the sale of a minority partnership interest in a hotel.
During the three months ended December 31, 2014, the net gain relates to the acceleration of $31 million of deferred gains primarily related to hotels that were converted from management to franchise contracts, a $10 million gain on the sale of our interest in an unconsolidated joint venture hotel, partially offset by a loss of $17 million from the sale of four wholly-owned hotels. The year ended December 31, 2014 also includes a net loss of $39 million from the impairment of three hotels, an impairment charge of $7 million associated with a foreign unconsolidated joint venture, and a $9 million charge related to the termination of a leasehold interest in a hotel which is now franchised.
c) During the year ended December 31, 2015, the net benefit relates to a gain recognized on the sale of a hotel by a joint venture in which the Company holds a minority interest. This gain is included in the equity earnings and gains from unconsolidated ventures, net line item in the statement of income.
d) During the year ended December 31, 2014, the net charge relates to the write-off of certain deferred financing costs associated with amending the Company's revolving credit facility.
e) During the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the amounts primarily relate to the tax benefit on the pre-tax special items.
f) During the three months ended December 31, 2015, the net tax benefit is primarily due to the recognition of the excess tax over book basis difference in a foreign subsidiary. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the net benefit further includes a favorable valuation allowance adjustment.
The Company has included the above supplemental information concerning special items to assist investors in analyzing Starwood's financial position and results of operations. The Company has chosen to provide this information to investors to enable them to perform meaningful comparisons of past, present and future operating results and as a means to emphasize the results of core ongoing operations.
Starwood will be conducting a conference call to discuss the fourth quarter financial results at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time today, available via webcast on the Company's website at http://www.starwoodhotels.com/corporate/about/investor/earnings.html. A webcast replay will be available on the corporate website a few hours after the live event on Thursday, February 18 and will run for one year. Alternatively, participants may dial into the live call at (866) 921-0636 with conference ID 6065537. Outside the U.S., participants may dial into the live call at (706) 758-8764. Please dial in fifteen minutes early to ensure a timely start. A call replay will be available a few hours after the live event on Thursday, February 18 and will run for one week; the call replay can be accessed by dialing (855) 859-2056 with conference ID 6065537. Outside the U.S., the call replay can be accessed at (404) 537-3406.
All references to EPS, unless otherwise noted, reflect earnings per diluted share from continuing operations attributable to Starwood's common stockholders. All references to continuing operations, discontinued operations and net income reflect amounts attributable to Starwood's common stockholders (i.e., excluding amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests). All references to net capital expenditures mean gross capital expenditures for timeshare and fractional inventory net of cost of sales. EBITDA represents net income before interest expense, taxes, depreciation and amortization. The Company believes that EBITDA is a useful measure of the Company's operating performance due to the significance of the Company's long-lived assets and level of indebtedness. EBITDA is a commonly used measure of performance in its industry which, when considered with GAAP measures, the Company believes gives a more complete understanding of the Company's operating performance. It also facilitates comparisons between the Company and its competitors. The Company's management has historically adjusted EBITDA (i.e., "Adjusted EBITDA") when evaluating operating performance for the Company, as well as for individual properties or groups of properties, because the Company believes that the inclusion or exclusion of certain recurring and non-recurring items, such as restructuring and other special charges (credits) and gains and losses on asset dispositions and impairments, is necessary to provide the most accurate measure of core operating results and as a means to evaluate comparative results. The Company's management also uses Adjusted EBITDA as a measure in determining the value of acquisitions and dispositions and it is used in the annual budget process. The Company has historically reported this measure to its investors and believes that the continued inclusion of Adjusted EBITDA provides consistency in its financial reporting and enables investors to perform more meaningful comparisons of past, present and future operating results and provides a means to evaluate the results of its core ongoing operations. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are not intended to represent cash flow from operations as defined by GAAP and such metrics should not be considered as an alternative to net income, cash flow from operations or any other performance measure prescribed by GAAP. The Company's calculation of EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA may be different from the calculations used by other companies and, therefore, comparability may be limited.
All references to Owned or Owned Hotels reflect the Company's owned, leased, and consolidated joint venture hotels. All references to Same-Store Owned Hotels reflect the Company's owned, leased and consolidated joint venture hotels, excluding condo hotels, hotels sold to date and hotels undergoing significant repositionings or for which comparable results are not available (i.e., hotels not owned during the entire periods presented or closed due to seasonality or natural disasters). References to Company-Operated Hotel metrics (e.g., REVPAR) reflect metrics for the Company's Owned and managed hotels. References to Systemwide metrics (e.g., REVPAR) reflect metrics for the Company's Owned, managed and franchised hotels. REVPAR is defined as revenue per available room. ADR is defined as average daily rate.
All references to revenues in constant dollars represent revenues excluding the impact of the movement of foreign exchange rates. The Company calculates revenues in constant dollars by calculating revenues for the current year using the prior year's exchange rates. The Company uses this revenue measure to better understand the underlying results and trends of the business, excluding the impact of movements in foreign exchange rates.
All references to contract sales or originated sales reflect vacation ownership sales before revenue adjustments for percentage of completion accounting methodology. All references to earnings from vacation ownership and residential represents operating income before depreciation expense. All references to management and franchise revenues represent base and incentive fees, franchise fees, amortization of deferred gains resulting from the sales of hotels subject to long-term management contracts and termination fees. All references to core fees represent total management and franchise fees.
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. is one of the leading hotel and leisure companies in the world with nearly 1,300 properties in some 100 countries and approximately 188,000 employees at its owned and managed properties. Starwood is a fully integrated owner, operator and franchisor of hotels, resorts and residences under the renowned brands: St. Regis®, The Luxury Collection®, W®, Westin®, Le Méridien®, Sheraton®, Tribute Portfolio™, Four Points® by Sheraton, Aloft®, and Element®, along with an expanded partnership with Design Hotels™. The Company also boasts one of the industry's leading loyalty programs, Starwood Preferred Guest (SPG ®). Visit www.starwoodhotels.com for more information and stay connected @starwoodbuzz on Twitter and Instagram and facebook.com/Starwood. For more information, including reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP financial measures, please visit www.starwoodhotels.com or contact Investor Relations at (203) 351-3500.
This communication includes "forward-looking" statements, as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 or by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") in its rules, regulations and releases. Forward-looking statements are any statements other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding Starwood's and Marriot's expectations, beliefs, hopes, intentions or strategies regarding the future. Among other things, these forward-looking statements may include statements regarding the proposed combination of Starwood and Marriott; our beliefs relating to value creation as a result of a potential combination with Marriott; the expected timetable for completing the transactions; benefits and synergies of the transactions; future opportunities for the combined company; and any other statements regarding Starwood's and Marriott's future beliefs, expectations, plans, intentions, financial condition or performance. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as "may," "will," "expects," "should," "believes," "plans," "anticipates," "estimates," "predicts," "potential," "continue," or other words of similar meaning. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed in, or implied by, the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to, general economic conditions, our financial and business prospects, our capital requirements, our financing prospects, our relationships with associates and labor unions, our ability to consummate potential acquisitions or dispositions or the spin-off of our vacation ownership business and its subsequent merger with a wholly-owned subsidiary of ILG or realize the anticipated benefits of such transactions, and those disclosed as risks in other reports filed by us with the SEC, including those described in Part I of our most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K as well as on Marriott's most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K and those discussed in the joint proxy statement/prospectus included in the registration statement on Form S-4 (Reg. No. 333-208684) filed by Marriott with the SEC on December 22, 2015 and the amendments thereto. Other risks and uncertainties include the timing and likelihood of completion of the proposed transactions between Starwood and Marriott, including the timing, receipt and terms and conditions of any required governmental and regulatory approvals for the proposed transactions that could reduce anticipated benefits or cause the parties to abandon the transactions; the possibility that Starwood's stockholders may not approve the proposed transactions; the possibility that Marriott's stockholders may not approve the proposed transactions; the possibility that the expected synergies and value creation from the proposed transactions will not be realized or will not be realized within the expected time period; the risk that the businesses of Starwood and Marriott will not be integrated successfully; disruption from the proposed transactions making it more difficult to maintain business and operational relationships; the risk that unexpected costs will be incurred; the possibility that the proposed transactions do not close, including due to the failure to satisfy the closing conditions; as well as more specific risks and uncertainties. We caution readers that any such statements are based on currently available operational, financial and competitive information, and they should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management's opinion only as of the date on which they were made. Except as required by law, we disclaim any obligation to review or update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances as they occur.
This communication is neither an offer to buy, nor a solicitation of an offer to sell, subscribe for or buy any securities or the solicitation of any vote or approval in any jurisdiction pursuant to or in connection with the proposed transaction or otherwise, nor shall there be any sale, issuance or transfer of securities in any jurisdiction in contravention of applicable law. No offer of securities shall be made except by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and otherwise in accordance with applicable law.
The proposed transaction involving Marriott and Starwood will be submitted to Starwood's stockholders and Marriott's stockholders for their consideration. In connection with the proposed transaction, Marriott has filed with the SEC on December 22, 2015 a registration statement on Form S-4 (Reg. No. 333-208684) that includes a joint proxy statement/prospectus for Starwood's stockholders and Marriott's stockholders. The registration statement, which has been amended in recent filings by Marriott, was declared effective by the SEC on February 17, 2016. Each of Starwood and Marriott will commence mailing the definitive joint proxy statement/prospectus to their respective stockholders on or about February 19, 2016, and Marriott may file other documents regarding the proposed transaction with the SEC. This communication is not intended to be, and is not, a substitute for such filings or for any other document that Marriott or Starwood may file with the SEC in connection with the proposed transaction. SECURITY HOLDERS ARE URGED TO READ ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC, INCLUDING THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT ON FORM S-4 AND THE JOINT PROXY STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS AND THE AMENDMENTS THERETO AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS, CAREFULLY WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE, BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. The registration statement, the joint proxy statement/prospectus, the amendments thereto and other relevant materials and any other documents filed or furnished by Marriott or Starwood with the SEC may be obtained free of charge at the SEC's web site at www.sec.gov. In addition, security holders will be able to obtain free copies of the registration statement, the joint proxy statement/prospectus and the amendments thereto from Marriott by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.marriott.com and from Starwood by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.starwoodhotels.com.
This communication does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities or a solicitation of any vote or approval. This communication may be deemed to be solicitation material in respect of the proposed merger between a wholly-owned subsidiary of ILG and Vistana Signature Experiences, Inc. ("Vistana"). In connection with the proposed merger, ILG has filed a registration statement on Form S-4, containing a proxy statement/prospectus with the SEC. STOCKHOLDERS OF ILG AND STARWOOD ARE URGED TO READ ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC, INCLUDING THE PROXY STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS, BECAUSE THEY CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSED MERGER. Investors and security holders will be able to obtain copies of the proxy statement/prospectus as well as other filings containing information about ILG, Starwood and Vistana, without charge, at the SEC's website, http://www.sec.gov. Copies of documents filed with the SEC by ILG will be made available free of charge on ILG's investor relations website. Copies of documents filed with the SEC by Starwood will be made available free of charge on Starwood's investor relations website.
Marriott, Starwood, their respective directors and certain of their respective executive officers and employees may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the proposed transaction with Marriott. Information about Marriott's directors and executive officers is set forth in its definitive proxy statement filed with the SEC on April 7, 2015 and information about Starwood's directors and executive officers is set forth in its definitive proxy statement filed with the SEC on April 17, 2015. These documents are available free of charge from the sources indicated above, and from Marriott by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.marriott.com and from Starwood by going to its investor relations page on its corporate web site at www.starwoodhotels.com. Additional information regarding the interests of participants in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the proposed transaction is presented in the joint proxy statement/prospectus included in the registration statement on Form S-4 (Reg. No. 333-208684) as amended by Marriott in a filing with the SEC on February 16, 2016 and declared effective by the SEC on February 17, 2016, and may be included in other relevant materials that Marriott and Starwood file with the SEC.
ILG and its directors and executive officers, and Starwood and its directors and executive officers, may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the holders of ILG common stock in respect of ILG's stock issuance in connection with the proposed merger of Vistana with a wholly owned subsidiary of ILG. Information about the directors and executive officers of ILG is set forth in the proxy statement for ILG's 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which was filed with the SEC on April 6, 2015. Information about the directors and executive officers of Starwood is set forth in the proxy statement for Starwood's 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which was filed with the SEC on April 17, 2015. Investors may obtain additional information regarding the interest of such participants by reading the proxy statement/prospectus regarding the proposed merger when it becomes available.
(a) The Company includes in revenues the reimbursement of costs incurred on behalf of managed hotel property owners and franchisees with no added margin and includes in costs and expenses these reimbursed costs. These costs relate primarily to payroll costs at managed properties where the Company is the employer.
(a) Includes restricted cash of $4 million and $3 million at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively.
(b) Excludes Starwood's share of unconsolidated joint venture debt aggregating approximately $186 million and $200 million at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively.
(a) Includes $3 million and $6 million of Starwood's share of interest expense from unconsolidated joint ventures for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and $14 million and $17 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(b) Includes $0 million and $(4) million of tax expense (benefit) recorded in discontinued operations for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and $0 million and $(5) million for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(c) Includes $6 million and $7 million of Starwood's share of depreciation expense from unconsolidated joint ventures for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and $20 million and $26 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(d) Includes $0 million and $1 million of Starwood's share of amortization expense from unconsolidated joint ventures for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and $1 million and $3 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(e) The gain on sale is included in the equity earnings and gains from unconsolidated ventures, net line item in the statement of income.
(f) Excludes the amount of income tax expense (benefit) included within (b) above.
(a) Same-Store Owned Hotel results exclude 10 hotels sold or closed and two hotels without comparable results for the three months ended December 31, 2015 and 13 hotels sold or closed, two leased hotels converted to managed or franchised hotels and four hotels without comparable results for the year ended December 31, 2015.
(1) Other Management and Franchise Revenues includes the amortization of the deferred gains of approximately $24 million in 2015 and $21 million in 2014 resulting from the sales of hotels subject to long-term management contracts and termination fees.
Note: Deferred revenue is calculated based on the Percentage of Completion ("POC") of the project. Deferred expenses, also based on POC, include product costs and direct sales and marketing costs only. Indirect sales and marketing costs are not deferred per ASC 978-720-25 and ASC 978-340-25.
(1) Represents earnings for owned, leased, and consolidated joint venture hotels before depreciation expense.
(1) Other Management and Franchise Revenues includes the amortization of the deferred gains of approximately $91 million in 2015 and $86 million in 2014 resulting from the sales of hotels subject to long-term management contracts and termination fees.
(4) For 2015 and 2014, includes $0 and $20 million of revenues and $0 and $9 million expenses associated with the St. Regis Bal Harbour residential project, respectively.
(1) Results consist of nine hotels sold or closed in 2014, two leased hotels converted to managed or franchised hotels in 2014, and four hotels sold in 2015. These amounts are included in the revenues and expenses from owned, leased, and consolidated joint venture hotels in the statements of income for 2015 and 2014.
(1) Maintenance capital expenditures include improvements that extend the useful life of the asset.
(2) Represents gross inventory capital expenditures of $48 million and $134 million in the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2015, less cost of sales of $14 million and $66 million in the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2015.


text:
Story /
A Joke That Is Not So Funny
A Joke That Is Not So Funny Essay Sample
Category: story
"Man has been endowed with reason, with the power to create, so that he can add to what he's been given. But up to now he hasn't been a creator, only a destroyer. Forests keep disappearing, rivers dry up, wild life's become extinct, the climate's ruined and the land grows poorer and uglier every day" (Russell). From this quote from Anton Chekhov, one can tell he viewed life in a very different way. Chekhov enjoyed writing stories about reality. He often wrote about tragic, true stories that happened in his own life.
Chekhov liked to write stories that were very sad and depressing but he just wanted to write about how he viewed life. The story, "A Joke," can be a true story in many lives, possibly even Anton Chekhov's life (kirjasto). The story "A Joke" is about a girl named Nadyzhda Petrovna and a guy whose name is not mentioned. The story begins when the two go sledding down a big hill. Nadya is very scared to go down but after the first time she wants to go again and again. They continue to go down the big hill more and more, day after day. Every time they would go down the hill, the guy would always say, "I love you, Nadya! "
Towards the end of the story, Nadya was at the top of the hill looking for the guy she always went down with but she could not find him. She went down the hill by herself and was very shaken up and faint at the bottom. In the end, Nadya got married to another man and had three children. The guy who once said the precious words "I love you" to her, looked back on the times he had with Nadya and wondered what his motives were in that "joke" (imagi-nation). Anton Chekhov was born on January 29, 1860, in Taganrog, Russia. He worked long and hard at his dad's grocery store when he was growing up.
For awhile, Chekhov went to a Greek school but when his dad went bankrupt they had to move to Moscow. He went to a school to study grammar when he moved there. He went to college at the University of Moscow to be a doctor. As Chekhov went to college, he started to write stories and comics for newspapers to make some money. He began to be popular not only with his stories and comics but with his novels. When Chekhov finished college he was a doctor for eight years. Even while he was working in the medical field, he wrote stories in the St. Petersburg daily Novoe vremya.
As he wrote so much in this newspaper he found his style of writing to be detached and liberal (Steinberg 767). As Chekhov grew more and more popular he made many accomplishments. The Pushkin Prize and getting nominated one of the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature were a couple of his achievements. Chekhov moved to Melikhove when he made writing his full time job. Neighbors, Ward Number Six, The Black Monk, The Murder, and Ariadne were some of his best stories.
His first play was called "The Seagull," and it was very successful. Since that play went so well, he wrote a few more including "Uncle Vanya," "The Three Sisters," and "The Cherry Orchard" (Murphy 192). In 1904, Chekhov married Olga Knipper who acted in many of the plays he wrote. Their marriage did not last long because Chekhov had to go into exile in the conclusion of his life because he got a lung hemorrhage. He still tried to make the productions of his plays but many times he had to stay in Crimea to get help with his health. A few years later he died of tuberculosis on July 14, 1904, when he was forty-four. Chekhov quoted, "All I wanted was to say honestly to people: 'Have a look at yourselves and see how bad and dreary your lives are! '
The important thing is that people should realize that, for when they do, they will most certainly create another and better life for themselves. " Many of the plays and stories he wrote were literal reflections and experiences he had in his own life (Russell). Chekhov took his stories and plays very seriously. He quoted, "A writer is not a confectioner, a cosmetic dealer, or an entertainer. He is a man who has signed a contract with his conscious and his sense of duty" (Russell). Chekhov loved to write stories that were very realistic.
Though his stories were very depressing and sad at times, Chekhov just wanted to get the point across that life is hard. He did not view life as a fairy tale so; therefore, he did not want to write about fairytales. Many times, his style of writing turned people off because it was so negative. He enjoyed writing about love and work but the two themes never worked out in a happy ending. There was usually a killing, affair, or failure that occurred that had to ruin the "fairytale" theme (kirjasto). The story "A Joke" is a good example of Chekhov's writing style.
At the beginning of the story, Nadya and the guy go sledding. It turns into a love story when they started to constantly go down the hill together and the guy always told Nadya he loved her. Sure enough, in the end, the two separate and Nadya gets married to another man. The guy was left always wondering what happened with the girl and him. It seemed like he regretted not ever finding out why nothing ever happened between the two of them. It is a good possibility that something like that happened to Chekhov or someone he knew because he liked to relate his stories to his personal life.
Maybe when he was younger, he was in love with a girl and he told her that he loved her. Eventually things did not work out and ever since, his view of love was changed for the worse. He could have possibly always regretted telling the girl he loved her, or the opposite, letting her go (imagi-nation). Chekhov was a very talented writer who could go from comics to sad short stories. His view of life was very clear through his writings.
He said, "My life is tedious, dull, monotonous, because I am a painter, a queer fish, and have been worried all my life with envy, discontent, disbelief in my work: I am always poor, I am a vagabond, but you are a wealthy, normal man, a landowner, a gentleman – why do you live so tamely and take so little from life? " (Russell). It seemed like he never enjoyed life and always looked at it from a negative point of view. Life should contain a balance between reality and optimism. Chekhov had a drastic view of reality and needed more optimism in his life. Realistic stories were Chekhov's specialty and that is why it is a good possibility one of his life experiences was reflected in the story "A Joke" (Murphy 192).
My Mother and Her Sister by Jane Rogers
"Jerry, Molly and Sam" Theme Esasy
Pages: 2 Word Count: 492
The short story "The Chrysanthemums"
A Victim of Fate?
Story about Mrs Birling

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Subscribe to the PowerCore newsletter for the latest news on PowerCore-ready products, promotions and events. No spam - we promise!
We are out there on the Social Media Networks - come hang with the cool kids!


The Project Controller coordinates the financial activities and tasks resulting in the presentation of financial and management reports regarding projects.
Monitor, review and analyse the actual financial results against budgets and communicate with Manager FAC / budget holders.
Together with the project managers create budgets and mid-term plans on projects.
Project progress monitoring, including confirmation with project managers and department managers and challenge the information provided on progress.
Estimate to Complete and Estimate at Completion is familiar terminology.
Familiar with cash flow planning and milestone management.
Developing and assisting the departments in business cases (CAPEX / OPEX).
Capable of developing scenario analysis based on the KPI output.
Monitoring of projects where input from a financial control perspective is needed.
Coordinate pre- and ex-post calculation of project cost controlling and ensure accurate integration in the monthly financial reports.
Ad hoc projects as defined/required by Local Management, Manager FAC, Director F&A, and CCFO.
Provide informal guidance to less experienced staff in the controlling department.
Initiates process improvements within the department.
Education at bachelor or master level, in Finance, Control and/or economics.
Minimum experience level of 2 years in a similar position.
Demonstrated analytical skills and ability to provide detailed accurate financial reports.
Experience in the pharmaceutical industry is a plus.
Knowledge of MS-Office, advanced user of Excel.
Helicopter view and ability to map processes and optimise them.
Customer focused, quality driven with a continuous improvement mind set.
Able to carry out several activities and projects in parallel.
Good knowledge of English and Dutch, both verbal and written.


text:
LCDR Godfrey DeCourcelles Chevalier, USN, Aviation Pioneer (1889 – 1922)
Providence-born Chevalier graduated from the Naval Academy in 1910. On July 12, 1916, he was launched from the first catapult designed for shipboard use, aboard USS North Carolina. In 1917 Chevalier was assigned to duty in Europe. He commanded the US Naval Aeronautic Station in Dunkirk and the Northern Bombing Squadron, US Naval Aviation Forces in Paris. In 1920 he participated in the conversion of the collier Jupiter into the United States' first aircraft carrier, USS Langley (CV 1). As Officer in Charge of the Aviation Detachment, he had been instrumental in the development of the arresting gear used aboard. On October 26, 1922, LCDR Chevalier made the very first landing on Langley's deck. Ironically, Chevalier never saw the full glory of the aircraft carrier. Less than three weeks later, he incurred fatal injuries in a plane crash near Norfolk.
Induction was accepted by the senior naval aviator present, Jack Everling, former CAG on USS Saratoga.
Edson Fessenden Gallaudet
More in Special Recognition Award:
126th Aviation Regiment, RIANG
2/LT William P. Armstrong
William P. Armstrong (1924- 1945) was a Tuskegee Airman/Fighter Pilot, shot down in action on April 1, 1945.
CAPT Karl Augenstein
More in US Navy:
LTC Stanley Auslander, USNR
Richard Warren Blackman
Alabama-born Richard Warren Blackman (1939—2013) made a major contribution to aviation in RI through
his lengthy service with the Civil Air Patrol (CAP).
Commander Harold J. Brow, USN


Single-stage, tankless Hand Pumps, are lightweight and easy to handle (their weight is less than 5kg for the standard version and 6kg for the INOX version). All Models are equipped with: • 490 mm removable activation handle, used to turn the bypass valve on through the front connection. • Fixing holes on the base. • 3/8"-18 NPT side ports for oil inlet and outlet. • All standard pump components, either internal or external, undergo the EUROPRESS exclusive thermo-chemical treatment, named Nitreg-ONC®, which makes steel exceptionally hard, resistant to corrosion and mechanical wear. The PP113 Pump is also available in stainless steel for use with water, and with different pump heads to be used at pressures lower than 700 bar (on demand).


text:
Semi Conductor & Solar
Home Shipping & Logistics Air Freight
The Top 10 Freight Airports in the US
What are the top 10 airports in the US doing to win your air cargo business?
It would be easy to assume that the busiest cargo airports in the US would correspond to those located the nation's largest cities or, perhaps, next to its busiest ports. But as we look at airports on this list, we see that quite a few other factors come into play: geography, workforce, infrastructure, and technology, to mention a few; also the economy, trade policy, and mundane factors such as airport fees, or even noise restrictions and how late a plane can land!
Most of the airports on this list continue to make aggressive investments in order to win your business. And with air freight demand predicted to fall closer in-line with supply in 2019 (see the article "2019 Air Freight Outlook"), it will be interesting to see who comes out ahead — and who falls behind — over the next 12 months.
Meanwhile, it's important to choose the cargo airport(s) that work(s) best with your current supply chain needs, so use a freight forwarder that can help you adjust your strategy as your needs — and the market — shifts. "The usage of strategic hubs is an integral part of our strategy to serve our customers, not only in the US, but in the entire Americas Region," says Asok Kumar, Head of Airfreight, Region Americas "In this regard, DB Schenker has extensive operations at all the top cargo airports in the US, giving us the necessary network and consolidation benefits to better meet our customers needs."
The rankings below are based on the 2018 ACI World Airport Traffic Report (WATR), which includes totals from 2017.
1. Memphis International Airport (MEM)
2017 Cargo in Metric Tons: 4,336,752
2017 World Rank: 2
Memphis International is all about cargo. While it isn't even in the top 50 for passengers, it's the busiest cargo airport in the US, and second in the world only to Hong Kong's 4.9 million metric tons. What accounts for the volume? For one thing, MEM is home to FedEx's SuperHub, which handles more than 180,000 packages per hour and generates some 400 flights daily.
The airport has four runways, sits on 3,900 acres, and has 1 million ft2 in cargo facilities. It's strategically located near the Port of Memphis, the second largest inland port in the US thanks to the Mississippi River.
DB Schenker offers full service Air Export and Import operations in Memphis, with 14,700 ft2 of warehouse space, four on-site Dangerous Goods Specialists, and features overnight access to Atlanta, Dallas and Chicago gateways.
2. Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (ANC)
ANC has even less passenger traffic than Memphis. But with approximately 80% of Asian airfreight imports entering the US through Anchorage, it's no wonder that ANC is the world's 5th busiest cargo airport. Besides being the closest US city to North Asia — a mere 6 to 7 hour flight — carriers also enjoy favorable U.S. Department of Transportation cargo transfer regulations. The fact that planes can take off and land 24/7 also helps. And the airport is a vital hub for Alaska for another reason: since more than 80% of the state is inaccessible by road, most goods destined for Alaska, whether they arrive by air, land or ocean, are delivered to ANC to be loaded onto planes large and small.
ANC sits on 4,600 acres and handles about 600 wide-body freighters a week. Cargo facilities operating at the airport are all privately owned including special cold supply chain facilities supporting Alaska's seafood trade.
DB Schenker handles air freight operations at ANC through its offices in Seattle, Washington.
3. Louisville International Airport (SDF)
Louisville is home to UPS's Worldport, a 5.2 million ft2 facility able to process over 400,000 packages per hour, mostly bound for domestic destinations. Besides easy highway access, the airport has access to three Class 1 railroads and two inland ports along the Ohio River. The airport's three runways and 1,500 acres are located right in the center of the city. Despite being smaller than some of the other airports on this list, it's still the 7th busiest cargo airport in the world.
DB Schenker's Louisville operations in are less than 4 miles from SDF and include 13,000 ft2 of warehouse space.
4. Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
2017 World Rank: 13
LAX serves the Greater Los Angeles area, the 3rd largest metropolitan economy in the world (after Tokyo and New York, approximately $770 billion), so it's no surprise that the airport is a major international gateway for cargo and passengers alike (it's the second busiest passenger airport in the US, after Atlanta, GA). Additionally, LAX is located just 25 miles from the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach (here's our list of top ports in the Americas), the busiest port in the US. For cargo, it's the world's 13th busiest airport. However, if you were to combine it with Ontario International, 55 miles to the east, and San Diego International, 125 miles to the south, the combined total cargo would make LAX the 4th busiest cargo airport in the world; for this list it would take the #2 slot.
LAX has 4 parallel runways and covers 3,500 acres. Carriers and 3PL providers have access to 2.1 million ft2 of capacity across more than 20 dedicated cargo facilities. An additional 4 million ft2 of cargo capacity is also available around or near the airport. And its proximity to the ports of LA and Long Beach, with their road and rail infrastructure, make the airport a key component of a global, multi-modal hub.
Los Angeles is home to one of DB Schenker's international logistics hubs. It maintains 22,000 ft2 of warehouse space in LA and two offices: one dedicated to Air and Ocean freight, the other to Breakbulk and Brokerage.
5. Miami International Airport (MIA)
As the southernmost international airport in the contiguous US, MIA handles more Latin American freight than any other airport: 83% of all air imports and 79% of all US air exports to the region . According to the airport, it also handles more international freight than any other airport in the US. And it's one of the most innovative — in the last two years it: became one of the first six U.S. cargo hub airports to eliminate a paper air waybill; was designated by the U.S. Department of Commerce as a Foreign Trade Zone magnet site; established the first ocean-to-air perishables trans-shipment program in Florida; launched an internet-based real-time cargo flight tracker; became IATA certified for handling pharmaceuticals. It's no wonder that Asia Cargo News recognized the airport as the 2018 Best Airport in North America for air cargo.
MIA has four runways on 3,300 acres, and has 3.4 million ft2 of warehouse, office and support space, including 445,000 ft2 of refrigerated warehouse space.
DB Schenker's Americas headquarters are located in Miami, only 13 miles from Miami International. Its global hub in Miami specializes in Latin America and beyond, and its 119,000 ft2 of warehouse space offers temperature-controlled options.
6. Chicago O'Hare International Airport (ORD)
It takes about 13 hours to fly from Shanghai to Chicago; still, an estimated 25% of ORD's international freight comes from China. In fact, Chicago's Midwest location makes it an ideal global gateway for Asian freight bound for the East Coast. And not just for air cargo: rail lines linking Chicago to West Coast ports make it a major gateway for ocean freight (click here to read about the Port of Vancouver/Chicago connection). In 2017, with air cargo volumes up over 12% YOY, Chicago O'Hare opened the second phase of a $220 million northeast cargo development, bringing the total cargo facility capacity to approximately 2 million ft2. At any given time, 15 widebody aircraft can unload at O'Hare. O'Hare is also the 3rd busiest passenger airport in the US, and is one of only ten international airports that are connected to more than 200 airports.
DB Schenker's international hub in Chicago offers full service brokerage 7 days a week. Their Certified Cargo Screening Facility (CCSF) consists of 160,000 ft2 of warehouse space and offers both cold (2-8˚ C) and temperature-controlled (15-25˚ C) processing. The facility also has the ability to consolidate air waybills into single weekly entry to save on CBP fees, as well as duty-saving FTZ capabilities targeted towards high value items. Just announced: weekly direct temperature-controlled service to Sydney.
7. John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
Although JFK ranks 7th on this list for total cargo volume by weight, it claims the top spot in the US for cargo value . And if cargo volume totals were combined with nearby EWR in Newark, NJ (the 11th busiest cargo airport in the US), the airport would rank just after Los Angeles.
The Port Authority of NY & NJ, which operates JFK, has invested over $7 billion in the airport to-date. With 1,700 acres dedicated to freight and some 4 million ft2 of cargo facilities supporting 600 international freight forwarders, JFK boasts some unique capabilities. For example: the Ark, a 78,000 ft2 facility designed to handle animals of all kinds, including livestock and exotic animals, opened in 2017. The new 70,000 ft2 Air France-KLM facility adds B747-8F aircraft capability. The airport offers extensive cold-chain processing capabilities for pharmaceuticals, food, and perishables. The entire cargo area is designated as an FTZ, and it's home to U.S. Customs for the Northeast region. The airport benefits from its proximity to the Ports of NY and NJ, and access to an extensive East Coast/National rail network. It also caters to trucking: the JFK Airport Travel Plaza offers truckers parking, fuel, food, and rest services — the first of it's kind in the US.
DB Schenker's international hub in New York includes 42,000 ft2 of warehouse space and offers comprehensive logistics solutions, customs brokerage services, risk management, and FTZ facilities.
8. Indianapolis International Airport (IND)
Located just 200 miles south of Chicago O'Hare is IND, another crucial gateway for the Midwest logistics sector. It's home to the second-largest FedEx hub in the world: the 2.4 million ft2 facility, which can sort 99,000 packages per hour and employs 4,000 workers, turned 30 last year and is scheduled for $1.5 billion in improvements over the next 7 years . IND operates five dedicated cargo facilities, including 40,000 ft2 of controlled-temperature space particularly geared to support the agroscience, bioscience, and pharmaceutical industries. The airport operates 3 runways on 7,700 acres and can accommodate large aircraft such as the 747-8F.
DB Schenker has two facilities in Indianapolis. Its Plainfield branch has 36,000 ft2 of warehouse space, of which 17,000 ft2 is temperature controlled, 1,500 ft2 is refrigerated and optimized for pharmaceuticals, and 5,000 ft2 is available for handling hazardous goods. A second 20,000 ft2 facility is located within the Foreign Trade Zone at IND and offers 14,000 ft2 of temperature controlled space, 5,000 ft2 of refrigerated space, and 800 ft2 of freezer space. Located only 1,600 ft from the cargo bay, the facility has direct ramp access and offers pallet buildup and breakdown within highly specific temperature ranges (e.g. +2 to +8° C, +15 to +21° C, and -2° C and below), as well as shipment re-icing prior to customs clearance if needed. DB Schenker Healthcare operates 3 direct GDP-certified Boeing 747-800 flights per week from IND to/from Europe, in partnership with Cargolux (watch the video here).
9. Cincinnati/North Kentucky International Airport (CVG)
2017 Cargo in Metric Tons: 944,995
CVG is by far the fastest growing cargo airport on this list. Cargo volume was up 27% in 2017 YOY, and is up an incredible 2000% over the last 10 years (the airport moved 43,800 metric tons of cargo in 2007). And that's before Amazon Prime Air new 3 million ft2 facility is completed in 2021. DHL's 108,000 packages-per-hour "superhub" is also here. CVG sits on 7,500 acres with lots of room for expansion. Its four runways, set in a crisscross pattern allowing for safe takeoffs and landings in a wide range of weather conditions, have plenty of extra capacity. And a 44% cut in landing fees in recent years, which the airport expects to lower even further once Amazon Prime Air is online, has helped make CVG an increasingly attractive option for both airfreight forwarders and passengers alike.
DB Schenker's offices and 25,000 ft2 of warehouse space are located directly adjacent to CVG and, in addition to air freight, it offers a full host of services, including global supply chain management, Customs clearance, and consulting.
10. Dallas/Ft Worth International Airport (DFW)
Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas
Watch out Miami, DFW has its sights on your Latin American business! And it's succeeding: DFW has become the #1 preferred U.S. connecting gateway between Latin America and Asia . One way it's done this is by increasing its cold storage capacity, with a new facility coming online in June 2017 that is an optimal connecting hub for perishables between the two regions. The airport is doing everything it can to transform itself from primarily a passenger airport (the 4th busiest in the US) to a serious air freight player. This includes leveraging its central location: DFW is a 4-hour flight or less to/from all major markets in North America; and it's a mere 7-hour drive from the Laredo Mexico border, which makes it a major hub for Asia- and Europe-bound Mexican exports arriving by truck. The airport is also looking to leverage valuable belly cargo capacity thanks to its vast network of 200 passenger destinations worldwide, its FTZ status, and competitive landing fees.
And this being Texas, everything is bigger: DFW has 20 million ft2 of on-airport warehouse capacity and seemingly unlimited room for expansion with its 17,200 acres of land, the second largest in the US (after Dallas). At #10 on this list, it's clear that Dallas/Ft Worth International doesn't intend to stay there!
Dallas is home to another one of DB Schenker's international hubs, offering air, ocean and land freight services, FTZ services, comprehensive logistics solutions and global supply chain management services.
Need more info about DB Schenker Air Freight solutions? Click here.
The Democratization of Industrial Automation and Robotics
2020 Airfreight Market Roundup
Top 15 Ports in the Americas 2019
What's Ahead for Airfreight in 2021?
Key Warehouse & Contract Logistics Trends from 2020
Improving Competitive Advantage with Good Transportation Management
Behind the Scenes on the High Seas: Cruise Ship Logistics
Top 15 Ports in The Americas
Three Things You Need to Know about Importing Chocolate
DB Schenker is the world's leading global logistics provider, delivering over 140 years of premium performance and transportation solutions. One call gets our customers on the fast track to nearly 2,000 locations in all of the world's most important economic regions.
+1 (800) 225-5229 (in USA)
+1 (602) 458-6200 (outside USA)
www.dbschenkerusa.com
www.dbschenker.ca
Categories Select Category Aerospace Air Freight Automotive Beverages Chemical Consumer Contract Logistics (SCM) Culture Customs Services Digitalization Electronics Events Fashion & Retail Healthcare & Pharma Industrial Industries Insights Land Transport Marine Parts Ocean Freight Oil & Gas Semicon & Solar Shipping & Logistics Sustainability Trade Trade Advisory Uncategorized
• DB Schenker Americas
• DB Schenker Canada
• DB Schenker Careers
• DB Schenker USA
• Trade Advisory Solutions
• LinkedIn
• Twitter USA
• Twitter Canada
© 2020 Schenker Americas, Inc. | Privacy Policy
We use cookies in order to optimize our website and continually improve it. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. You can find further information on cookies in our privacy policy. Accept


How did you benefit from participating in the Adams Apprenticeship program?
Being a part of the inaugural Adams class, I benefited tremendously from the program. I heard about the program during my junior year (2014) in Jim Kitchen's class and really didn't know what to expect. The program allowed me to pitch my startup, Waterless Buddy's, to tons of local business professionals while also getting to know fellow undergrad and MBA students. That was probably my favorite part – getting to interact with the MBA students. The Adams program made it very easy to connect.
I don't think I have stopped benefiting from the program. I joked with a few of the Adams folks and said, "It's going to be awesome to look back one day and remember where we started." Most of us in the program are aspiring entrepreneurs who want to rule the world – and some of us might very well do so. It'll be a real treat when we can all come back to the Adams program one day and share those stories.
What was the most valuable part of the Adams Apprenticeship experience for you?
The people. It's that simple. The program is filled with ultra-talented members in all facets of business. That answer applies to my entire college career.
How did the UNC network help you connect with Griffin Brothers?
I met Mike Griffin (BSBA '87), a partner at Griffin Brothers, while competing in the Carolina Challenge. He was one of the judges during the semi-final round of the competition.
During the Q&A section of our pitch, Mike mentioned knowing someone big in the car wash space. Since our business was a waterless car wash, my co-founders and I approached him after everyone had finished to hear his opinion on our business.
Unfortunately, Mike didn't invest in our company on the spot (I know, shocker), but he wanted to stay in touch and agreed to contact us when he was back in Chapel Hill.
When Mike reached out, the three of us met him at Old Chicago. Long story short, that opportunity helped me develop a relationship with Mike. He became a mentor to me. I would call him to share news about Waterless Buddy's and he would give me advice. Most of the time Mike would remind me that while he didn't think the business was sustainable, but it could teach me valuable lessons about entrepreneurship and encouraged me to press on.
Around that time, Mike mentioned something about a job at Griffin Brothers. Over the years, he hired two UNC Kenan-Flagler MBA grads for the position. I knew the job was similar to an entrepreneurial apprenticeship, but he never really got into specifics until the fall of my senior year. One day, I woke up to a text (maybe it was 11 a.m., but it was senior year) that said, "Hey Austin, we have an extra Blue Zone ticket if you want to join us." Of course I jumped up, threw on my UNC polo and headed to the game. Little did I know, Mike was giving me a little interview. A few weeks later, I had a job offer on the table.
The funny part about this whole situation is that I never saw myself in Charlotte post-graduation. I was dead set on going to the West Coast or working on my own startup. However, the greatest things that have happened to me in my life have been unplanned.
It just so happened that Mike was an Adams Advisor, so the entire situation really came full circle. The program affected me in a way that I never expected.
Austin Helms (BSBA '16) on the job with Griffin Brothers.
Describe your job at Griffin Brothers.
I am an entrepreneurial apprentice, which means I do a lot of different things. Griffin Brothers is a family business involved with real estate, country club management, construction and demolition (C&D) waste, and a diverse range of other entrepreneurial endeavors. I tell my friends that this might be the only job in the country where you can be on a landfill and working with a wedding planner in the same day.
I am a project manager for some parts of the business and work directly with Mike and COO John Brown to brainstorm new ideas/businesses for Griffin Brothers to pursue. We also look for businesses that have legacy challenges or companies that "nobody wants to do," which usually have higher margins. Mike has coined this "BUB" – buying ugly businesses.
Why did this opportunity appeal to you?
Mike. If you have the opportunity to meet Mike, you quickly learn that he is a great business person who loves to develop young entrepreneurs.
It is an opportunity like no other. I told myself that accepting a corporate job was something that would be very hard for me to do. Working for the Griffins makes me feel like I am part of the family. It's fun – and I could tell that it would be from the little time I spent with Mike beforehand.
The diversity of the job. If you would've told me that post-grad I would be working with an event space, helping build a farm and driving a compactor on a landfill, I would've never believed you. This diversity makes it an incredible opportunity.
I am learning how to manage a large company, deal with conflict and adapt to the market. I plan to own multiple companies, and this experience is helping me build a very strong foundation for my career.
In my first two months with the company, I met a diverse group of individuals and grew my personal network. I believe this is because of the strong family name that the Griffins have created.
What are your short-term and long-term career and entrepreneurship goals?
Publish a book. I wrote a book during my college tenure. The book is written for future college students who want to make the most of their college journey. It will be published in spring 2017.
Find an opportunity to pursue under the Griffin Brothers umbrella. I'm looking for a new business opportunity or a potential BUB.
Take a brand national. When you think about an industry or a product, I want you think about something that I helped create.
If you could go back in time, what advice would you give yourself at the beginning of your B-School journey?
Do it now. Whatever idea, concept or business that you want to start, just do it. I don't run the car wash business I started in college anymore, but I didn't fail!
How did business school help prepare you to navigate the entrepreneurial journey?
Business school opened doors that wouldn't have otherwise been opened. I can't thank Jim Kitchen, Dina Rousset, Ted Zoller, Tim Flood and others enough for the impact they had during my time at UNC Kenan-Flagler.
What is the best part about being an entrepreneur? What is the most challenging part?
The best part about being an entrepreneur is watching someone use your product or enjoy your service. The most challenging – yet most rewarding – part is definitely the journey. It's like running a race. You sweat, your body hurts and you want to give up, but when you cross the finish line it makes it all worth it.


text:
The Web / Travel / Video
Dancing Matt in Hawaii
by Ryan Kawailani Ozawa · Published January 30, 2011 · Updated January 30, 2011
"Where the Hell is Matt?" It's a question for the ages. Or at least those of an age to remember the earliest days of web video.
Who The Hell is Matt?
Six years ago, former video game designer Matt Harding decided to travel the world. A video clip of him dancing in Vietnam kicked off a series of clips of him dancing in other far-flung destinations, and an edited montage of his globe-spanning jig was soon being passed around the Internet. It actually predated the birth of YouTube in 2005, making his original outing one of the first examples of a "viral video."
The video captured the attention of the tech press, and soon, the mainstream media as well. As his fame grew, he compiled even more clips to create a second version in 2006, landing his first sponsorship in the process. It's been watched more than 16 million times so far.
Matt's third video, posted in 2008, took 14 months to create and included traveling through 42 countries. It's also his biggest hit yet, garnering 34 million views and counting.
His success has kept him quite busy. He published a book about his adventures, and is a highly sought after speaker. He's continued to travel and dance and post videos to YouTube, last year touring South Africa to celebrate the World Cup.
Matt's videos have been cited endlessly by teachers, scientists, sociologists, even government leaders as proof that music and dance and joy are universal human experiences.
But in case some remote corner of the world has still missed out his mission, he's making yet another global dance video. And Hawaii was one of his stops.
Aloha, Matt!
Last month, I blogged about Maui entrepreneur Erik Blair, whose T-shirt themed adventure was inspired in part by Matt. And it was Erik who let me know that Matt was coming to Honolulu… stopping on the island for a mere 24 hours en route to the South Pacific. He chose Waimea Bay on the North Shore as his backdrop.
"I know there are a million beautiful spots in Hawaii on all the islands," Matt wrote. "I chose Oahu because it's where I've received the most email and I want to be able to dance with as many of you as possible."
And while Matt has embraced his tagline, "Dancing Badly Around the World," he decided to mix it up a little this time.
"In this new video, I'm actually learning how to dance, so I'll be showing some easy moves and asking people to follow along," he wrote. "But don't worry, I'm still not very good at dancing so you don't have to be perfect either. Just remember to smile and have fun."
After an especially exhausting week at work, a trip to the beach sounded spectacular to me. I loaded my family into the van, and headed out.
Although the kids were looking forward to frolicking in the ocean, high surf conditions prompted lifeguards to post signs forbid all but the most experienced swimmers and surfers from the water. Nonetheless, it was a beautiful day, and we relaxed and played on the sand while huge waves crashed on shore.
As the appointed time drew near, people began to gather, and more than a few people were erroneously identified as Matt, which definitely helped break the ice among his fans. When Matt finally did arrive, there were hugs and leis and laughs. But having staged public group dances a few times before, Matt was also incredibly efficient in getting everyone up to speed and getting the video shoot set up.
In all, more than 50 people of all ages formed a crowd of complete strangers that gleefully and unabashedly danced in varied and silly ways until the sun went down, flailing and cheering and splashing in the surf.
And when the official video shoot was done, Matt and his small team hung around to make sure every single fan had a few moments to meet him, dance with him, and take pictures with him. He signed autographs, signed copies of his book, and signed copies of official "I Danced with Matt" T-shirts, unveiled in the first time here in Honolulu. The last photos taken with Matt were captured in the parking lot, long after the sun had set.
Video In, Video Out
Alas, Matt was spending just one day in Hawaii. The next stop on this latest "dancing badly" tour is the Solomon Islands, a location with a special meaning to Matt and his fans.
His first video was set to "Sweet Lullaby," a track by "Deep Forest." The song, which was everywhere during the early 1990s, was based on "Rorogwela," a Baegu lullaby from the Solomon Islands.
Matt says the final video should be online by late 2011. He notes that his Hawaii shoot might not make the final cut, but to be sure, the memories of dancing with him at Waimea Bay were more than worth the trip.
If you've not seen the latest "Where the Hell is Matt?" video, be sure to watch it now. Then, for a behind-the-scenes look at what goes into just one of those clips, check out my "Where the Hell is Matt in Hawaii" video, embedded above from YouTube, and also available in crisper high def on Vimeo.
Tags: beachdancingVideowaimea
Next story Shawn Ching Returns to TV News
Previous story Lunch at Padovani's Grill


text:
Tag - time
COMMENTARY: Blacks are sitting ducks after Gov. Abbott lifts mask mandate
By: Roy Douglas Malonson Greg Abbott has lost his damn mind! The Texas governor announced this week that Texas will be reopening at 100 % and he is...
Houston's 1st Black City Secretary
Patricia Jefferson Daniel has been selected to serve as the City Secretary in Houston, marking the first time an African American has been chosen for the...
Former cop makes deathbed confession in role of Malcolm X's murder
Malcolm X's family is asking for the reopening of his murder investigation after the deathbed confession of a former New York police officer who claims...
It'™s time to change our approach to Black History
Our heroic approach has been to primarily concentrate on the heroes and heroines that have carried the torch. Truly, Martin, Malcom and Ms. Rosa Parks are...
COMMENTARY: Hitlerism: Trumpism
Republicans are sick and penicillin is not the cure, because they desire to live in an entirely White country. America was never a White country because Native...
PRESS ROOM: Sandra J. Evers-Manly Elected to 2020 Class of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences
With more than 25 years of experience in the film industry, Sandra Evers-Manly has made a lasting imprint on both the filmmaking community and the community at...


text:
"""python-rtmixer interface for sound output."""

# Authors: Eric Larson <larsoner@uw.edu>
#
# License: BSD (3-clause)

import atexit
import sys

import numpy as np

from rtmixer import Mixer, RingBuffer
import sounddevice
from .._utils import logger, get_config

_PRIORITY = 100
_DEFAULT_NAME = None

# only initialize each mixer once and reuse it until Python closes
_MIXER_REGISTRY = {}

def _get_mixer(fs, n_channels, api, name, api_options):
    """Select the API and device."""
    # API
    if api is None:
        api = get_config('SOUND_CARD_API', None)
    if api is None:
        # Eventually we should maybe allow 'Windows WDM-KS',
        # 'Windows DirectSound', or 'MME'
        api = dict(
            darwin='Core Audio',
            win32='Windows WASAPI',
            linux='ALSA',
            linux2='ALSA',
        )[sys.platform]
    key = (fs, n_channels, api, name)
    if key not in _MIXER_REGISTRY:
        _MIXER_REGISTRY[key] = _init_mixer(fs, n_channels, api, name,
                                           api_options)
    return _MIXER_REGISTRY[key]

def _init_mixer(fs, n_channels, api, name, api_options=None):
    devices = sounddevice.query_devices()
    if len(devices) == 0:
        raise OSError('No sound devices found!')
    apis = sounddevice.query_hostapis()
    for ai, this_api in enumerate(apis):
        if this_api['name'] == api:
            api = this_api
            break
    else:
        raise RuntimeError('Could not find host API %s' % (api,))
    del this_api

    # Name
    if name is None:
        name = get_config('SOUND_CARD_NAME', None)
    if name is None:
        global _DEFAULT_NAME
        if _DEFAULT_NAME is None:
            di = api['default_output_device']
            _DEFAULT_NAME = devices[di]['name']
            logger.exp('Selected default sound device: %r' % (_DEFAULT_NAME,))
        name = _DEFAULT_NAME
    possible = list()
    for di, device in enumerate(devices):
        if device['hostapi'] == ai:
            possible.append(device['name'])
            if name in device['name']:
                break
    else:
        raise RuntimeError('Could not find device on API %r with name '
                           'containing %r, found:\n%s'
                           % (api['name'], name, '\n'.join(possible)))
    param_str = ('sound card %r (devices[%d]) via %r'
                 % (device['name'], di, api['name']))
    extra_settings = None
    if api_options is not None:
        if api['name'] == 'Windows WASAPI':
            # exclusive mode is needed for zero jitter on Windows in testing
            extra_settings = sounddevice.WasapiSettings(**api_options)
        else:
            raise ValueError(
                'api_options only supported for "Windows WASAPI" backend, '
                'using %s backend got api_options=%s'
                % (api['name'], api_options))
        param_str += ' with options %s' % (api_options,)
    param_str += ', %d channels' % (n_channels,)
    if fs is not None:
        param_str += ' @ %d Hz' % (fs,)
    try:
        mixer = Mixer(
            samplerate=fs, latency='low', channels=n_channels,
            dither_off=True, device=di,
            extra_settings=extra_settings)
    except Exception as exp:
        raise RuntimeError('Could not set up %s:\n%s' % (param_str, exp))
    assert mixer.channels == n_channels
    if fs is None:
        param_str += ' @ %d Hz' % (mixer.samplerate,)
    else:
        assert mixer.samplerate == fs

    mixer.start()
    assert mixer.active
    logger.info('Expyfun: using %s, %0.1f ms nominal latency'
                % (param_str, 1000 * device['default_low_output_latency']))
    atexit.register(lambda: (mixer.abort(), mixer.close()))
    return mixer

class SoundPlayer(object):
    """SoundPlayer based on rtmixer."""

    def __init__(self, data, fs=None, loop=False, api=None, name=None,
                 fixed_delay=None, api_options=None):
        self._data = np.ascontiguousarray(
            np.clip(np.atleast_2d(data).T, -1, 1).astype(np.float32))
        self.loop = bool(loop)
        self._n_samples, n_channels = self._data.shape
        assert n_channels >= 1
        self._n_channels = n_channels
        self._mixer = None  # in case the next line crashes, __del__ works
        self._mixer = _get_mixer(fs, self._n_channels, api, name, api_options)
        if loop:
            self._ring = RingBuffer(self._data.itemsize * self._n_channels,
                                    self._data.size)
            self._ring.write(self._data)
        self._fs = float(self._mixer.samplerate)
        self._ec_duration = self._n_samples / self._fs
        self._action = None
        self._fixed_delay = fixed_delay
        if fixed_delay is not None:
            logger.info('Expyfun: Using fixed audio delay %0.1f ms'
                        % (1000 * fixed_delay,))
        else:
            logger.info('Expyfun: Variable audio delay')

    @property
    def fs(self):
        return self._fs

    @property
    def playing(self):
        return self._action is not None and self._mixer is not None

    @property
    def _start_time(self):
        if self._fixed_delay is not None:
            return self._mixer.time + self._fixed_delay
        else:
            return 0.

    def play(self):
        """Play."""
        if not self.playing and self._mixer is not None:
            if self.loop:
                self._action = self._mixer.play_ringbuffer(
                    self._ring, start=self._start_time)
            else:
                self._action = self._mixer.play_buffer(
                    self._data, self._data.shape[1], start=self._start_time)

    def stop(self, wait=True, extra_delay=0.):
        """Stop."""
        if self.playing:
            action, self._action = self._action, None
            # Impose the same delay here that we imposed on the stim start
            cancel_action = self._mixer.cancel(
                action, time=self._start_time + extra_delay)
            if wait:
                self._mixer.wait(cancel_action)
            else:
                return cancel_action

    def delete(self):
        """Delete."""
        if getattr(self, '_mixer', None) is not None:
            self.stop(wait=False)
            mixer, self._mixer = self._mixer, None
            stats = mixer.fetch_and_reset_stats().stats
            logger.exp('%d underflows %d blocks'
                       % (stats.output_underflows, stats.blocks))

    def __del__(self):  # noqa
        self.delete()

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
ALL PRODUCTS PROUDLY MADE IN USA
Orders Over $99 Qualify for Free Standard Shipping - *Limited to the lower 48 states*
Alabama Supreme Court Shoots Down Law Banning Open Carry of Pistol 'on Premises Not One's Own'
Posted by jhingarat21 on 7th Sep 2015
The Alabama Supreme Court on Friday ruled a state law that banned the open carry of a gun on someone else's property is unconstitutional.
Friday's ruling by the court came in an appeal by Jason Dean Tulley, 38, of his Jacksonville city court conviction for openly carrying a pistol on his hip while inside the First Educators Credit Union on March 31, 2011.
An off-duty police officer working security at the credit union told Tulley to leave the credit union and put the gun in his car. Tulley, who at the time also had a conceal carry permit, argued his rights but eventually complied. Tulley was charged days later.
The high state court's ruling overturns Tulley's conviction on the charge.
"This is definitely a victory for gun rights advocates," said J.D. Lloyd, one of Tulley's appellate lawyers. "More importantly, it's a victory for folks who believe in Due Process and don't want to see the Legislature passing vague criminal statutes."
But what about business owners who don't want people carrying guns inside their businesses?
"I believe businesses still have options available to limit people bringing firearms onto their property, but open carry advocates shouldn't fear criminal prosecution under 13A-11-52 going forward," Lloyd said.
Tulley was prosecuted in the City of Jacksonville municipal court for violating a state law – 13A-11-52 – that prohibited "carrying a pistol on premises not one's own or under his control," court records show.
Tulley appealed his conviction to the Circuit Court of Calhoun County and lost. The court of criminal appeals upheld the conviction. But on Friday the Alabama Supreme Court in a 5-3 decision ruled that the law was unconstitutional and unenforceable.
"At the heart of the case was their (the supreme court's) determination that the statute is unconstitutionally vague because it doesn't possess a punishment provision and the Code of Alabama doesn't supply a "catch-all" punishment provision for the offense," Lloyd said.
At one time the old law did have a punishment clause but in 1940 during revisions of the state code the punishment provision was dropped, court records show.
The Alabama Legislature in 2013 did update the law to include a phrase that states no one can carry on premises not there own or under their control "unless the person possesses a valid concealed weapon permit or the person has the consent of the owner or legal possessor of the premises."
But the revision did not add a punishment clause.
The Alabama Supreme Court noted that few cases in the long history of the law challenging convictions had ever reached them.
"It is telling that only three cases since the 1940 Code omitted the punishment provision from what is now 13A-11-52 have reached the appellate level; those three cases involved juvenile proceedings, which are quasi-criminal in nature," the court states in its ruling. "It does not appear that any of the juvenile defendants raised any issue regarding the failure of 13A-11-52 to provide punishment for the offense."
Cities can prosecute state crimes as municipal violations, Lloyd said. However, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that because state law was unconstitutional, the prosecution by the city under that law is improper, he said.
In order to criminalize carrying a pistol openly on someone else's premises, Legislators "would have to go back in and fix it (the law) because this is an offense that can't be prosecuted right now," Lloyd said.
Lloyd said he worked on the appeals with Birmingham attorney Joe Basiger, who originally tried the case.
banned the open carry of a gun
bringing firearms onto their property
carrying guns
Jason Dean Tulley
state law was unconstitutional
Join our newsletter and receive a code for 10% OFF your next order!
Mon. to Fri.:
9am - 5pm (CST)
Sat. & Sun. Closed
Underground Series
Product Combos
Safety Warnings
© Versacarry® All Rights Reserved.
Ask the Holster/Firearm Experts any of your questions on versacarry.com


If you have a Denied Boarding voucher, you can book your flights between 7 and 365 days after the date the voucher was issued by getting in touch with us.
The journey you can book will depend on the journey you were taking when you were denied boarding. If you can find your journey listed in the table below, you can redeem your Denied Boarding voucher for any of the flights also listed as long as it is on an Emirates operated route.
However depending on your voucher type, you may be able to book a trip listed in another table. This is outlined in the Voucher options summary table at the bottom of this page.
What will I receive as compensation if I'm not accepted on my flight?
When will I get my voucher and where do I collect it from?
How can I convert my voucher into a ticket of my choice?
Can I give the voucher to family or friends?
Can my voucher be issued as two or more tickets?
Am I allowed to change the date or route of my compensation ticket?
Who should I contact to change the date or route on my ticket?
Can I book the Emirates Chauffeur-drive service on my compensation ticket?
Am I entitled to earn Skywards Miles on the compensation ticket?
Can I upgrade my compensation ticket using my Skywards Miles?
Can I claim a denied boarding compensation ticket without the voucher?


text:
<link rel="import" href="../../bower_components/polymer/polymer.html"/>
<link rel="import" href="../shared/fonts/fonts.html"/>
<link rel="import" href="../shared/js/colors.html"/>
<link rel="import" href="../mm-icon/mm-icon.html"/>
<link rel="import" href="../mm-close-panel/mm-close-panel.html"/>
<link rel="import" href="../mm-list/mm-list.html"/>
<link rel="import" href="../mm-list-item/mm-list-item.html"/>
<link rel="import" href="../shared/js/measure.html"/>
<polymer-element name="mm-input" attributes="value overflow placeholder validation disabled search icon clear maxlength autocomplete width layout fitparent maxItems error data type" constructor="MMInput">
	<template>
		<link href="mm-input.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"/>
		<input id="input" type="{{type}}" class="_mm_text_input {{state}} {{ { bottom:$.closePanel.calcValign == 'BOTTOM', top:$.closePanel.calcValign == 'TOP', invalid:error == true } | tokenList }}" placeholder="{{placeholder}}" value="{{value}}" maxlength="{{maxlength}}" style="width:{{width | getWidth}}; padding-right:{{ paddingRight }}px;" />

			<mm-icon type="{{icon}}" width="14" height="14" primaryColor="[[PRIMARY_ICON_COLOR]]"></mm-icon>

			<mm-icon type="fail" width="14" height="14" primaryColor="[[PRIMARY_ICON_COLOR]]"></mm-icon>

		<template if="{{autocomplete}}">
			<mm-close-panel id="closePanel" fitparent="{{fitparent}}" target="{{$.input}}" offsetY="-1" auto="true" mode="dropdown" state="{{state}}" scope="{{}}" class="{{ { bottom:$.closePanel.calcValign == 'BOTTOM', top:$.closePanel.calcValign == 'TOP' } | tokenList }}">
				<content id="search" select="mm-input"></content>

					<mm-list on-selected="{{onSelectItem}}" id="itemList">
						<template repeat="{{searchItems}}">
							<mm-list-item value="{{value}}">{{name}}</mm-list-item>
						</template>
					</mm-list>

			</mm-close-panel>
		</template>
	</template>

</polymer-element>