Baldwins Stepfather in Notes to a Native Son Essay -- James Baldwin

The Effects on a Narrative Son From His Stepfather In order to effectively analyze something, it is necessary to thoroughly examine and discuss the subject. James Baldwin does this in his essay â€Å"Notes of a Native Son† by describing his experiences growing up with his stepfather while weaving in discussion. Baldwin’s comments during these breaks in his stories draw conclusions and generalizations about himself, his relationship with his father, and its influence on James Baldwin. He uses this analysis to discover and help the audience understand how he was and is affected by his stepfather. Baldwin’s stepfather was very quiet and remote in his relationships with his children. In his essay, Baldwin presents many stories portraying examples of this which all appear early on in the essay. One of the most important stories about his childhood with his stepfather is when they walk back home from church and have their only meaningful conversation together. Baldwin writes that the opportunities in America are â€Å"thicker† than any other place and as a result of this â€Å"the generation has no time to talk to the first†(63). Unlike this observation by Baldwin, his stepfather didn’t avoid contact with the world because of the available opportunities. Instead, Baldwin’s stepfather kept himself away from his children and the world because of his immense anger and hatred. Baldwin remembers his father â€Å"sitting at the window, locked up in his terrors; hating and fearing every living soul including his children who had betrayed him, to o, by reaching towards the world which had despised him†(66). James Baldwin’s stepfather feels extremely rejected by the world and as a result hates everything in it and in contact with it. He feels betra... ...s to be hatred, as described in earlier passages but in this case Baldwin shows that they are ultimately caused by pride. Baldwin uses his narration and analysis to realize that although he ignored his father during his childhood, he could have benefitted by learning something from his warnings. In the final sentence of the essay Baldwin writes, â€Å"I wished that he had been beside me so that I could have searched his face for the answers which only the future would give me now† (84). Baldwin realizes that through similar experiences he and his stepfather have learned much about the world. He wishes that he could still learn from his stepfather but knows that he must now rely on his future experiences. Works Cited Baldwin, James. â€Å"Notes of a Native Son.† 1955. James Baldwin: Collected Essays. Ed. Toni Morrison. New York: Library of America, 1998. 63-84.

Puma’s Ag Case

PUMA’s AG Case Adalbert and Rudolf Dassler founded puma in 1924 in Germany. The company was called Gebruder Dassler OHG, and was internationally well known. However, the two brothers separated creating Adidas and Puma, respectively. Puma had sponsored some of the worlds most famous soccer players, positioning itself as one of the most important company in soccer shoes and accessories. In spite of that, the son of the founder, Armin Dassler, take Puma to a point where all product were sold â€Å"dirt-cheap†, ruining the brand image. The high society was not willing to wear the brand.In 1993, Jochen Zeitz, became the CEO of the company, and together with Martin Gaensler, the supply chain management chief, applied 3 significant phases into the Comeback of Puma: * Aimed at making Puma profitable in order to build a strong financial foundation. * Restructuring the whole company * Focusing in core competencies: marketing, brand management, and product management. * Transform Puma into an attractive sports brand. (High- value brand in sport and lifestyle sales categories). * Sponsoring and advertisement. Puma’s major competitors 1. Adidas –Salomon AG * Headquarters in Bavaria, Germany. Production was in every continent, except in Australia, with administration, design, and marketing in Germany and France. * Production outsourced in Asia. * Only supplier covered all sports. * Main strength soccer line, sky and tennis market. * Known as a brand for the family, satisfying customer’s needs. * Sponsoring activities on huge sports events, famous teams, and athletes like FIFA World Cup and UEFA Champions League. 2. Nike * American company founded by Bill Bowerman and Phil Knight in 1964. * Outsourced part of the production to China and concentrated its skills on product design, marketing, and distribution. Located in Oregon. * Administrative activities concentrated in United States. * Europe, Africa, and Asia worked only in sales strategies . * Target group young people with the slogan â€Å"Just do it† * Marketing strategy: sponsoring events, popular teams, and athletes. * Introduction to specialized brands * Web-based Nike ID (customizing Nike products) 3. Reebok * Founded in 1895 in USA by Joseph William. * Key market: footwear industry (aerobics industry, women’s sportswear, and design street & casual footwear). * Located in 140 countries. R & D in China, Korea, and Taiwan. Distribution finished goods via traditional retailers. * Sales in Gym club trainers. * Reebok female sports shoes were the most famous. * 1992, change of strategy to American football, basketball, and soccer. * Sponsoring sport events and popular athletes. * Nevertheless, Reebok was often regarded as a fitness and exercise equipment manufacturer. 4. Fila * 1911, Italy. * Distribution in 50 countries. * Portfolio of sportswear and athletic footwear. * Focus on running, basketball, and fitness. 5. Prada * Italian brand focused on lux ury leather goods. * Founded by Mario Prada. 2003 Sportive line called Prada Sport. 6. Diesel * 1970. Casualwear or sportswear company that became a luxury brand. PUMA’s Value Chain * R&D: sourcing, production, and logistics * 80% of all production move to Asia due to raw materials and MOD * Manufactured in Turkey and Mexico * It reduces its working capital and inventory to 21% * The raw material sourcing allowing shortening the production and enabling full quality control of input factors. (Inditex’s Zara strategy) * Production partners according to quality, price, and environmental/social factors. Logistics was not a core competence. * Brand management * Turnaround new positioning of the brand itself. * 1980’s unpopular image due to heavy price decline. * Jochen Zeitz (CEO), repositioned the brand * Making PUMA desirable again * 2003, the brand was already positioned and well-known and considered as a luxury * Ensuring success, PUMA hired charismatic personali ties who could represent and understand the desired brand perception, recognition, and awareness even further. * Sponsoring several teams such as the Jamaican running team, Cameroon soccer team, and Italian national soccer team. Sponsoring Formula One, entering by the official supply of sportswear for the FIA World Rally Championship, the Ford Rally division, and freestyle motocross champion Travis Pastrana. * Quality over quantity and rely on innovation. * Following upcoming trends quickly and creating trends. * The Puma classic King was reintroduced creating a new market segment of lifestyle sportswear, having in consequence to it a significant competitive advantage over competitors from the fashion industry. * CEO understood the fashion as â€Å"the new combination of elements of the past†. * Right time for launching a new product line. Puma entered in the cricket market in Australia and Africa. * Advertising in MTV and in Hollywood movies. * Puma was perceived as rebellio us and stylish. * Distribution * Outsourcing 70% in distribution logistics. * Building up a system to develop its own network in Europe. * Retail activities * Selected partners according to the corporate message of Puma. * Sport retailer did not operated globally; only foot Locker and Intersport, Decathlon, and JJB Sports. * There was no price discrimination due to low transportation costs in Europe. * Collaboration with strategic partners and allies Acquired the Swedish company Tretorn (manufacturer of tennis balls), because of the sophisticated and broad distribution system in the Scandinavian market and a very skilled management team. Corporative Strategy: R&D and design (functionality and stylish appearance products). Launching the New Collection: sport, lifestyle, and fashion. * Trying to be innovative in every part of the process * Marketing strategy Innovation * Modernizing latest collections and re-launch them Bibliography. Kaufmann, Lutz. â€Å"Puma AG†. The WHU Otto Beisheim Graduate School of Management.

The Most Important Bankruptcy Supreme Court Cases - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1336 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2019/08/08 Category Law Essay Level High school Tags: Supreme Court Cases Essay Did you like this example? The Most Important Bankruptcy Supreme Court Cases Issue Whether debtor’s retained counsel could be compensated for the fees and expenses incurred in the defense of its bankruptcy fee application. Facts The Southern District of Texas Bankruptcy Court awarded Baker Botts, LLP, along with Jordan, Hyden, Womber, Culbreth Holzer, PC, approximately $120 million in fees for representing ASARCO, LLC, one of the leading copper producers in the U.S., who filed for Chapter 11. As the bankruptcy court noted in its initial fee award order, the DOJ described the ASARCO case as â€Å"the largest environmental bankruptcy in U.S. history.† In 2009 ASARCO emerged with a reorganization plan that would pay its creditors in full, $1.4 billion in cash and resolution of its environmental liabilities. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Most Important Bankruptcy Supreme Court Cases" essay for you Create order Baker Botts filed for a final fee request, which ASARCO contested. After extensive discovery and a 6-day trial, the Bankruptcy Court overruled the objections and awarded $120 million in compensation, $4.1 million as an â€Å"enhancement for exceptional performance,† and $5 million in fees for defending the applications. The district court affirmed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the Bankruptcy Code did not allow the firms to recover $5 million spent defending the fee request against Asarcos opposition. The Fifth Circuit held that (i) the American Rule (discussed below) controls absent explicit statutory authority providing reimbursement of defense fees and (ii) defense fees fall outside of  §330(a)(1)’s requirement that services are only compensable â€Å"if they are likely to benefit a debtor’s estate or are necessary to case administration† because the professional, not the estate, is the â€Å"primary beneficiary of a profe ssional fee application.† The Supreme Court then granted certiorari and heard oral argument on February 25, 2015. Holding On June 15, 2015, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Fifth Circuit in finding that fee defense costs were not recoverable. Justice Thomas wrote the opinion for a six Justice majority (Justice Sotomayor concurring for purposes of the outcome). Justice Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Kagan and Ginsburg. The Supreme Court’s review of the language of Bankruptcy Code  §330(a)(1) led the Court to conclude that it did not provide the sort of â€Å"explicit statutory authority† necessary to override the American Rule and therefore bankruptcy professionals employed under  §327(a) of the Bankruptcy Code may not, under  §330(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, recover as compensation fees incurred in defending their bankruptcy fee applications. The Court’s majority stated, â€Å"[t]he word ‘services’ ordinarily refers to ‘labor performed for another.’† Since Baker Botts was litigating to defend its own fees, the Court reason ed that it was not providing an â€Å"actual, necessary service† to the bankruptcy estate and therefore was not entitled to compensation for such time. Baker Botts’ Significance and Aftermath Following the issuance of the Baker Botts opinion, bankruptcy professionals have raised concerns that the ruling will lead to litigants tactically using fee objections to pressure debtors and their retained professionals. However, since the Baker Botts decision questions have been raised whether there is a possible workaround. That question has been tested in cases since Baker Botts. For example, in the Delaware cases In re Boomerang Tube, LLC, et al. Case No. 15-11247 (MFW) and In re Northshore Mainland Services, Inc., et al. (15-11402-KJC) (a/k/a the Baha Mar case), the bankruptcy court declined to allow Baker Botts ruling to be avoided by contract.   In the Boomerang case, the law firm for the official committee of unsecured creditors asked for the fee approval order to include a provision that would entitle it to be compensated from the bankruptcy estate for fees incurred in defending its fees against any challenges. The law firm relied upon  §328 of the Bankruptcy Code, which allows for the retention of estate professionals â€Å"on any reasonable terms and conditions† arguing that the Supreme Court in Baker Botts recognized that parties could and regularly did contract around the American Rule. The Boomerang Court denied the request and held that  §328 does not create a statutory exception to the American Rule, because it does not mention awarding fees or costs in the context of an adversarial proceeding. In support of the court’s ruling, the Boomerang Court rejected the law firm’s argument that  §328 permitted a contractual agreement for the payment of defense fees because the retention agreement was between the law firm and the official creditors’ committee, but it would be Boomerang Tube’s bankruptcy estate, a non-party to such agreement, that would bear the costs.   Finally, the Boomerang Court determined that the proposed fee shifting provisions were not â€Å"reasonable† terms of employment of professionals with the meaning of  §328. However, decisions in two other cases, In re Nortel Networks, 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 674 (Bankr. D. Del. Mar. 8, 2017) and in a New Mexico case, In re Hungry Horse LLC, Case No. 16-11222, distinguished Boomerang Tube and permitted contractual provisions that allow payment for the defense of fees.   Nortel Networks that Baker Botts and Boomerang Tube did not apply to a fee dispute between an indenture trustee and certain bondholders, and permitted the trustee to recover its attorneys’ fees for defending against the challenge.   Although this case is not directly on point as it did not involve an estate professional, and Judge Gross was not opining on whether Section 328 would permit such an agreement, he held that the bond indenture qualified as a contractual exception to the American Rule, noting that, unlike the retention agreement in Boomerang Tube, it was an agreement directly between the debtor and the trustee. In Hungry Horse New Mexico Bankruptcy Judge David Thuma looked to Nortel Networks for support in holding that a retention agreement in a chapter 11 case between proposed debtor’s counsel and the debtor could pass muster under Section 328, thereby permitting a contractual work-around to Baker Botts.   Judge Thuma first determined that nothing in Baker Botts prevented a bankruptcy court from finding a fee defense provision in a retention agreement to be â€Å"reasonable† within the meaning of Section 328.   In his reading of Baker Botts, the Court simply limited the compensation an estate professional could receive under Section 330 to fees for services to the client, rather than on its own behalf, and noted that Section 328 had no applicability to that issue. He then considered various other provisions typical of retention agreements, and observed that several were â€Å"reasonable† under Section 328 even if they were intended to favor the professional, rather than the client. He pointed to provisions, among other things, setting out retainer requirements, permitting an attorney to withdraw under certain conditions, and granting a lien on certain recoveries.   â€Å"A typical employment agreement between a lawyer and a client has many terms; some benefit the client, while others benefit the lawyer.   Considered together, they may be reasonable.†Ã‚   The overall effect, he noted, is that â€Å"the client obtains the services of needed, able professionals.† Judge Thuma concluded that Section 328 therefore can permit contractual exceptions to the American Rule, and outlined the terms of a fee defense provision in a retention agreement that he believed was â€Å"reasonable† and â€Å"violat[ed] neither the letter nor spirit of [Baker Botts].†Ã‚   He stated that, among other things, it needed to be agreed to by the bankruptcy estate, in order to avoid the issue highlighted by Judge Walrath in Boomerang Tube, and provided also that it extended to the creditors’ committee’s professionals, in order to â€Å"level the playing field.†Ã‚   He suggested sample language that he believed could be acceptable under Section 328: Fee Defense. The Client agrees to pay all reasonable legal fees and expenses incurred by the Firm, and also by any counsel retained by the unsecured creditors’ committee (if one is formed in the Client’s bankruptcy case) for successfully defending their respective fee applications. The bankruptcy court must approve all of such fees as reasonable. The Client will have no obligation to pay for any fees or expenses the Firm incurs defending fees that are not allowed. The pragmatic approach taken in Hungry Horse in particular offers a template that other courts will likely be urged to adopt. https://www.abi.org/feed-item/delaware-takes-on-baker-botts-v-asarco-fee-defense-costs