Starbucks Plans Delivery After Sales Fall Short

NEW YORK (AP) — After reporting disappointing quarterly sales Thursday, Starbucks said it will offer a delivery option on its mobile app in select areas of the U.S starting next year.

The Seattle-based company declined to provide more details, but has been pushing to get people to use its app as a way to build customer loyalty. It also previously said it plans to let customers across the country place orders ahead of time on their smartphone by next year, an option intended to get people in and out of stores quicker.

"We are playing offense," CEO Howard Schultz said in explaining the various steps the company is taking to adapt to changing customer habits, including their move toward online shopping and away from brick-and-mortar stores.

The delivery plans for the second half of 2015 were announced by Schultz during a conference call Thursday discussing the company's fiscal fourth quarter results. For the period ended Sept. 28, Starbucks reported sales that rose but fell short of Wall Street expectations. Global sales at established locations rose 5 percent, including in the Americas and Asia.

Starbucks Corp. is pushing aggressively into different areas as it faces more competition from fast-food chains serving specialty coffees. To boost sales of food in the afternoon, for instance, it has been revamping its sandwiches and adding new offerings like a grilled cheese sandwich that's warmed up in an oven.

This summer, Starbucks also launched its Fizzio soda drinks in the Sunbelt. But Wells Fargo analysts said in a note this week that their checks at a dozen stores in six states suggested the drinks aren't performing up to expectations so far.

In a phone interview, Chief Operating Officer Troy Alstead said the soda drinks are doing "exactly what we expected it to do," but that a national launch isn't planned for 2015. In a previous interview, Alstead had said he expected the drinks to be in much of the U.S. by the upcoming summer.

Alstead said Starbucks is instead focusing on growing its tea business. He said tea accounted for a "high single digit" percentage of sales last year, and that the company expects it to reach "well into the teens" over time.

For the quarter, Starbuckst earned $587.9 million, or 77 cents per share. Not including one-time item, it earned 74 cents per share, which was in line with Wall Street expectations, according to FactSet.

Revenue came in at $4.18 billion, short of the $4.24 billion analysts expected.

For the current quarter ending in December, Starbucks expects its per-share earnings to range from 79 cents to 81 cents. Analysts expected 83 cents per share. The company expects full-year earnings in the range of $3.08 to $3.13 per share.

Shares of Starbucks were down 4 percent at $74.04.

___

Follow Candice Choi at www.twitter.com/candicechoi

If You Had A Verizon Family Plan In The 2000s, There's Some Cash Coming Your Way

Verizon agreed to a proposed settlement last week under which it would pay $64.2 million to settle claims that it overcharged customers who signed up for family plans.

Family SharePlan customers were allegedly billed for in-network calls that were supposed to be free, according to a class-action lawsuit filed in 2006 in a New Jersey federal court. Customers with that plan were also allegedly billed more than the advertised rate for additional minutes they used over their monthly allowance.

The alleged overcharges happened between 2002 and 2006, at the height of so-called "family share" plans' popularity with customers.

Under the terms of the settlement, which has yet to be approved by the court, Verizon would pay $36.7 million into a settlement fund, according to court filings obtained by Consumerist. Once lawyer fees and other expenses have been deducted -- $19.26 million alone will be paid to plaintiffs' attorneys, Law360 reports -- Verizon would pay the remaining amount in cash and bill credits to affected customers.

Verizon would then pay out another $27.5 million in the form of credits for free phone calls, the court documents state.

When asked whether Verizon had deliberately overcharged people with Family SharePlans, or whether it was merely a mistake, Peter Bezek, one of the attorneys who filed the class-action suit, said he believed it was “primarily an oversight.”

“I assume they legitimately believed in the billing practices they had,” Bezek told The Huffington Post. “Ultimately, when they were shown there were, in fact, billing problems, they acted responsibly and settled the case.”

Verizon declined to comment for this story.

Of course, we don’t make phone calls today nearly as much as we used to, opting instead to send text messages and emails. As a result, cell phone providers now offer plans with unlimited talk time, meaning this problem is unlikely to happen on a large scale again.

But just because charging for "minutes" isn't as common now doesn't mean that Verizon -- and companies like it -- won't overcharge you in other ways. Verizon and AT&T have both been accused of other types of improper billing, and have had to pay out substantial sums of money in order to make such cases go away.

Tim Cook Comes Out As Gay In Powerful Businessweek Essay

Apple CEO Tim Cook came out as gay in a powerful essay for Bloomberg Businessweek.

In the essay, published Thursday, Cook said that he has never denied being gay, but has not publicly discussed his sexuality until now: "So let me be clear: I’m proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me."

He described how his sexuality has given him an acute social perspective.

Being gay has given me a deeper understanding of what it means to be in the minority and provided a window into the challenges that people in other minority groups deal with every day. It’s made me more empathetic, which has led to a richer life. It’s been tough and uncomfortable at times, but it has given me the confidence to be myself, to follow my own path, and to rise above adversity and bigotry. It’s also given me the skin of a rhinoceros, which comes in handy when you’re the CEO of Apple.

The revelation comes just days after Cook advocated on behalf of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in his home state of Alabama.

"[Alabama is] still too slow on equality for the LGBT community," he said, per the Associated Press, while calling for laws protecting people based on sexual orientation and gender identity. "Under the law, citizens of Alabama can still be fired based on their sexual orientation. We can't change the past, but we can learn from it and we can create a different future."

Cook's sexuality has been a point of speculation for quite some time. Gawker reported that Cook was gay back in 2011 before he succeeded Steve Jobs.

Since then, Cook himself has seemingly dropped hints about his sexuality. Last year, during a speech about human rights at Auburn University Cook discussed the discrimination he faced as a young person, according to ValleyWag.

"Since these early days, I have seen and have experienced many types of discrimination and all of them were rooted in the fear of people that were different than the majority," he said.

However, since the 53-year-old had not publicly come out, the question still remained. In May, the New York Times ran a story titled "Where Are The Gay Chief Executives?" and had to subsequently clarify their definition of "openly gay." CNBC's Simon Hobbs made headlines for mistakenly saying Cook was "fairly open" about being gay during a live segment back in June.

Head over to Businessweek to read Cook's full essay.

Being A Politician Is The Scariest Job In America

Americans think being a politician is scarier than being a mortician or an infectious disease doctor. In fact, there's no job in the U.S. that workers fear more than being an elected official, according to a nationwide survey by CareerBuilder.

It's all that public speaking, rejection and accountability associated with the job that terrifies workers most.

CareerBuilder's survey, conducted by Harris Poll, asked 3,103 full-time workers nationwide which jobs they found "most frightful." Here are the top 10 scariest jobs, straight from CareerBuilder's survey:

1. Politician: There are 56,857 politicians/legislators in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $9.89
Average salary for U.S. Senators and members of the House of Representatives in 2014: $174,0001
Scary for those who fear: Responsibility; accountability to a large number of people; rejection.

2. Microbiologist for Infectious Diseases: In general, there are 20,800 microbiologists in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $32.61
Scary for those who fear: Germs; Ebola; accidentally leaving the hazmat suit at home.

3. Security Guard at Teen Pop Idol Concert: In general, there are 1,163,023 security guards in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $11.62
Scary for those who fear: Getting trampled by screaming tweens.

4. Kindergarten Teacher: There are 158,084 kindergarten teachers (non-special education) in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $24.12
Scary for those who fear: Germs; temper tantrums; shaping the minds of America’s youth.

5. Crime Scene Investigator: There are 128,432 detectives and criminal investigators and forensic science technicians in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $35.75
Scary for those who fear: Blood; the disappointment on people’s faces when you tell them the job is nothing like it is on TV.

6. Animal Trainer: There are 32,360 animal trainer jobs in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $12.03
Scary for those who fear: Animal attacks; allergy flare-ups.

7. Mortician: There are 27,505 mortician, undertaker and funeral director jobs in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $22.83
Scary for those who fear: Dead bodies; silence; zombie attacks.

8. Radio, Cellular and Tower Equipment Installers and Repairers: There are 16,213 radio, cellular and tower equipment installer and repairer jobs in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $21.59
Scary for those who fear: Heights.

9. Stand-Up Comedian: There are 37,272 jobs in the entertainers and performers, sports and related workers industry, which include comedians, in the U.S.
Median hourly pay: $16.89
Scary for those who fear: Public speaking; awkward silence.

10. Parent: There are too many parent jobs in the U.S. to count.
Median hourly pay: Not nearly enough.
Scary for those who fear: Almost all of the above fears.

CareerBuilder notes that there are 56,857 Americans working as politicians or legislators making a ghastly low median wage of $9.89 per hour, according to Economic Modeling Specialists Intl, a market research company.

A Gallup poll found that 40 percent of Americans fear public speaking. That could explain why we're so petrified of the idea of being a politician, stand-up comic, or kindergarden teacher. Also, trust in government has plummeted to an all-time low, so that may have something to do with our fear of being a politician.

Majority Of Kroger Shoppers Want Gun-Friendly Chain To Ban Guns

The cadre of mothers crusading to ban the open carry of firearms in stores has added a new poll to its arsenal.

Sixty-four percent of shoppers in states allowing gun owners to brandish their weapons in public want supermarket giant Kroger to prohibit open carry in its stores, according to the poll, commissioned by Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense In America, the increasingly powerful gun-control group backed by billionaire Michael Bloomberg.

On Wednesday, the moms plan to picket outside Kroger’s annual investor relations meeting in Cincinnati armed with a 300,000-signature petition and the poll, which was released Tuesday by the Benenson Strategy Group.

“People are now just realizing how absurd it is that someone could bring a loaded AR-15 into Kroger with them while they’re shopping,” Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday.

Moms Demand Action has already notched significant victories through powerful social media campaigns. At its urging, corporate food chains Chili’s, Sonic, Jack in the Box, Chipotle and Starbucks asked customers to leave guns at home or in the car. After a prolonged fight, during which the moms faced fierce rallies by rifle-toting open-carry advocates, the group convinced Target to announce a no-guns policy.

But the Kroger campaign marked a shift for the group toward more sophisticated tactics. Flush with cash from Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety fund, the moms rolled out campaign ads for the first time last month. Meant to jolt shoppers into realizing the absurdity of allowing assault-grade firearms in the stores, the ads juxtapose a person with an AR-15 slung around his shoulders with either a child holding an ice cream cone, a shirtless man or a teenager with a skateboard. The message: Deadly weapons are allowed at Kroger, where policy forbids these other, relatively harmless things.

One of the ads released by Moms Demand Action to pressure Kroger to ban guns.

Two radio ads, made by recording real customer service calls to Kroger, are also getting air time.

Since the moms embarked on the campaign, smaller grocers have approached the group for help drafting gun bans of their own.

Watts said her group chose the supermarket giant because of its size and visibility. Kroger operates 2,419 stores in 31 states, most of which are in the South and Midwest, regions where gun culture and the powerful National Rifle Association maintain a stronger grip than in, say, the liberal Northeast.

“We wanted to pick a campaign that would give us the opportunity, frankly, to do more brand damage by running ads,” Watts said. “They may at first sit back and allow the brand damage to occur, and then realize, ‘Oh, wait, we’re alienating most of our customer base, which is women and mothers.”

Kroger said it has no plans to change its current policy, and that it believes the Everytown is "a national political organization that is attempting to use retailers to further their agenda."

"Kroger's policy has been and continues to be to follow state and local laws and to ask customers to be respectful of others while shopping in our stores," Keith Dailey, a spokesman for the chain, wrote in an email to HuffPost. "We believe the controversial gun issue is best resolved by lawmakers, not retailers."

Though the results of the moms' new poll should be taken with a grain of salt, considering the group financed the poll, the findings indicate a desire to leave guns out of the grocery store.

A huge majority of those polled, 83 percent, said they believe Kroger has the right to prohibit guns if it so chooses. And 61 percent of shoppers who have guns in their homes say they don’t think such a policy would violate their Second Amendment rights. Most notably, 52 percent of shoppers who said they support a gun ban at Kroger keep firearms in their homes.

Open-carry activists marched through a Target location in Texas to protest the moms' early efforts pushing the retailer to ban guns.

Watts said most of the retailers that have announced no-guns rules over the last year conducted their own polls ahead of any policy changes.

But the rules aren’t always legally binding. It can be difficult for individual chains to enforce the policies, both legally and logistically, if a defiant customer decides to carry in a loaded assault rifle strapped to their back. But Watts, who has endured violent threats and brutal, misogynistic hate speech since founding the group after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, said the policies are first steps toward loosening the grip of the NRA gun culture.

“Ultimately,” she said, “businesses cannot withstand the wrath of American moms and women.”

This story has been updated with a statement from Kroger.

Lululemon Partners With Dalai Lama, Enrages Critics

Lululemon can't even donate to charity without miring itself in controversy.

The yoga-wear retailer is getting slammed after announcing a partnership this week with the Dalai Lama Center for Peace and Education. Lululemon will contribute $750,000 to the Tibetan spiritual leader's nonprofit organization over the next three years to expand education initiatives and for "researching the connection between mind-body-heart," according to the company's press release.

Some critics say the alliance is hogwash. They don't think the Dalai Lama's name should be associated with a money-making enterprise and complain he's been "hijacked" and turned into a mere corporate marketing tool.

A mob flocked to Lululemon's official blog, lighting up the comments section with accusations of hypocrisy.

"As he believes that luxuries are not necessities, you believe in $100 yoga pants," one commenter pointed out.

"It is offensive that you have sunk so low as to use the Dalai Lama and his image as part of your branding," another wrote.

"I am put-off by Lululemon’s bizarre effort to hijack the Dalai Lama for brand-building and commercial gain," a third added.

A few who spoke out against the partnership claimed not to like the Dalai Lama, with one calling him "cruel" and another calling him "greedy."

Lululemon appears to disagree. "Both organizations share a common vision for developing the next generation of compassionate leaders in the world and are committed to engaging and empowering healthy communities," the company said in its press release.

Lululemon and the Dalai Lama Center did not respond to requests for additional comment.

Lululemon has a lot on its plate. Last spring, quality control issues sparked a recall of too-sheer yoga pants. Then, last fall, co-founder Chip Wilson irked many customers when he said Lululemon's pants "don't work" for some women's bodies. Earlier this month, Lululemon managed to offend the entire city of Buffalo, New York, by making fun of its NFL team.

One commenter summarized: "Dear Lulu, your product is still in question, don’t get me wrong. Great marketing, done! Now get back to improving your product and winning clients back."

The 10 Most Livable Countries Right Now

Based on the most recent release of the Human Development Index by the United Nations Development Programme, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the most and least livable countries. Data from the Human Development Index is based on three dimensions of human progress — having a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable, and having a good standard of living. According to the index, Norway is the most livable country in the world, while Niger is the least livable.

One factor that influences a country’s development is its income. The U.N. used gross national income in its calculation of the Human Development Index to reflect the standard of living in a country. In the most developed countries, gross income per capita is generally quite high. All of the world’s 10 most livable countries had among the top 30 gross national incomes per person. The top-rated country, Norway, had the world’s sixth highest gross national income per capita of $63,909.

At the other end of the spectrum, the world’s least developed countries typically had very low incomes. Six of these 10 least livable nations were among the bottom 10 countries by gross national income per capita. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, which had the lowest gross national income per capita in the world, at just $444 last year, was the second least developed country worldwide.

Click here to see the 10 most livable countries

Similarly, these countries also generally had extremely high percentage of their populations living on just $1.25 a day or less, adjusted for purchasing power. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo and in Burundi, more than 80% of the population lived on less than $1.25 per day.

Life expectancies, another factor considered in the Human Development Index, were also far better in highly developed nations. Switzerland, Australia, and Singapore were all among the top rated countries with life expectancies greater than 82 years for individuals born in 2013. By this metric, the United States is a relative laggard. The median life expectancy at birth in the U.S. of 78.9 years was ranked just 38th worldwide.

For individuals born in the world’s least developed nations, the average life expectancy was far lower. In all but one of these nations, a person born in 2013 had a life expectancy of less than 60 years. Sierra Leone, the fifth-lowest ranked nation, had the worst life expectancy, at just 45.6 years.

Sadly, among the factors contributing to these low life expectancies are, almost certainly, high mortality rates for infants and young children. Sierra Leone, which had the lowest life expectancy, also had the highest mortality rates for infants and children under five, at 117 deaths and 182 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Education also plays a role in determining development. In all but one of the most developed countries, residents aged 25 and older spent an average of more than 12 years in school. By contrast, in all of the world’s least developed countries, adult residents had less than four years of education on average.

The most and least developed nations also tend to be clustered geographically. Five of the 10 most developed countries are located in Europe. All of the least developed nations, on the other hand, are located in Africa, where political turmoil, health crises, and lack of infrastructure are far more common.

Despite their low scores, however, several of the world’s least developed nations have worked towards improving their economies in recent years, and their Human Development Index scores have improved as well. Mozambique is perhaps the best example. While it is still the 10th lowest rated nation, its score had risen by 2.5% per year between 2000 and 2013, faster than almost all other countries globally. Burundi’s score also rose substantially, by 2.3% per year in that time.

Click here to see the 10 least livable countries

To identify the most and least developed nations, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the latest Human Development Index figures published by the U.N. The index included three dimensions made up of select metrics. The health dimension incorporated life expectancy at birth. The education dimension was based on the average and expected years of schooling, for adults 25 and older and newly-enrolled children, respectively. The standard of living dimension was determined by gross national income per capita. We also considered other statistics published by the U.N. alongside the index, including inequality measures, mortality measures, poverty rates, and expenditures on health and education as a percent of gross domestic product (GDP). All data are for the most recent period available.

These are the most livable countries.