You canâ drink whiskey from a bottle of wine. The headline is deliberately misleading and bears little if nay resemblance to the story. The jobs/closures issue is unrelated to and predates any tariff stuff.
But I guess the truth and educating the public isnât journalistically satisfying enoughâŠ? More reason for those inclined to, to say mean things about the media
Every organization has their agenda or is dominated by outside organization with their agenda. Why else does the US main stream support for every foreign adventure.
This topic deserves a thread of its own.
Clickbait titles sell.
A couple months ago, YouTube titles became aggressively egregious.
Obviously âclickbaitâ titles, that often had NOTHING to do with the actual content. That practice continues through yesterday.
I have no expectation that itâll be changed to something more Brinkley or Huntly-esque in the near future.
Youtuber authors complained that the âtitlesâ of their videos are FORCED on them, by Youtube.
The Youtubers pleaded with viewers to recognize this and to not judge the Youtuber by the âclick baitâ titles.
I find it annoying to have to consciously âresetâ my brain from the âimplied topicâ, and focus on the actual video message, without the âsilo-ingâ of my expectations.
I find that many times the âimpliedâ topic is apparently not even in the video.
YouTube provides the âthumbs up/downâ vote. It should include a vote for the title, too.
But, click bait titles attract eyeballs. Eyeballs are $ for TTD, and Google YouTube.
The Desk says Q1 2025: YouTube grabs $8.93 billion in ad revenue during Q1 ⊠and that this is a ârecordâ.
The linked article in the OP is hosted/aggregated by Yahoo Finance/News, from a REUTERS article.
Wikipedia says Yahoo, Inc is owned by Apollo Global Mgmt and VZ:
It is operated by the namesake company Yahoo! Inc., which is 90% owned by Apollo Global Management and 10% by Verizon.
Donât expect clickbait titles to go away.
ralph
I used to read Reuters, but, itâs titles and content became steadily more clickbaitie, so when it went to subscription/fees, I bailed.
Iâm thinking you didnât read the story? Amazon is reducing deliveries through UPS by 50%, but the CEO also clearly says theyâre positioning because of the impacts of tariffs and possible recession.
Here. Let me help:
The move comes as Trump's aggressive trade policies have begun slowing economic growth and increasing expectations for a possible recession.âThe world hasnât been faced with such enormous potential impacts to trade in more than 100 years,â CEO Carol Tome said on the companyâs earnings call.
Clearly the CEO is not taking about the Amazon part of the move, but the tariffs-to-come part. Did you miss that?
The reduction in business was planned before the tariffs were announced or hit.
In January UPS announced that it had reached a deal with Amazon, its biggest customer, to lower its volume by more than 50% by the second half of 2026.
During UPSâ fourth-quarter earnings conference call in January, TomĂ© said that the company had partnered with Amazon for almost 30 years and that when its contract came up this year, UPS decided to reassess the relationship.
âAmazon is our largest customer but itâs not our most profitable customer,â TomĂ© said at the time. âIts margin is very dilutive to the U.S. domestic business.â
DB2
The company announced after 2024 Q4 earnings that they intended to reduce the number of Amazon deliveries by 50% by June 2026.
This layoff is related to that effort as well as a general push to streamline operations.
Of course it was, although Iâm sure theyâve been figuring out the numbers ever since. And the fact that they specifically mentioned âtariffsâ, which as we know is a âhostile and politicalâ should be indicative that they really think tariffs will impact their business.
And they will, so UPS is taking into account the loss of some of the Amazon business (other reports say itâs only 50%) and the unknown future. Better to get it over with in one swell foop rather than an endless series of layoffs upon layoffs. One big one is bad enough, but an endless series of smaller ones is worse.
Lately I see tons of those electric Amazon trucks driving around. I mean I see them everywhere, everyday. I suspect that Amazon is using UPS less and less with time, they use their own distribution centers and their own trucks, and a little USPS. Thatâs bad for UPS. And Amazon delivers for all the stuff they sell on their own and all the stuff they fulfill for others (FBA). Want to know what could be worse for UPS? If Amazon ever has extra capacity on their trucks, they may sell their services selectively to others who need to deliver on the same routes. That would be yet another blow to UPS.
That is what the âbig threeâ have been crying about, as they systematically cull their product lines, from the bottom up, shrinking volume, closing factories, and laying off thousands, to fluff up their profit margin for Wall Street approval.
Steve