A notice received from police by the Apex Council of public sector unions said the protest could go ahead but also warned that police would stop the march if it turned violent.
“The regulating authority still reserves the right to stop the gathering should it turn out to a public order threat or violent. Police will monitor,” Oscar Mugomeri, police commander for Harare central district, wrote in the letter.
Mugomeri could not be reached for comment on Monday.
Unions say Mnangagwa’s government has not responded to demands for U.S. dollar-indexed salaries to cushion public sector workers against inflation that economists say reached 380% in September.
Daily life in Zimbabwe is getting harder, with prices of basic goods, fuel and electricity rising as hope fades for a quick economic recovery under Mnangagwa, who took power after the late Robert Mugabe was ousted in a coup in 2017.
Mnangagwa has banned several opposition protests and faces accusations that he is using Mugabe’s heavy-handed tactics.
Police have been on high alert since January when fuel protests turned violent and at least a dozen people were killed during a security crackdown.
Unions want the lowest government employees paid the equivalent of $475 (7,251 Zimbabwe dollars) a month compared to the 1,023 Zimbabwe dollars they earn now.
Finance Minister Mthuli Ncube, who projects the economy to contract by 6.5% this year, has said the government cannot meet the workers’ demands.
Charles Chinosengwa, spokesman for the Apex Council, which represents 230,000 workers – excluding the health and security sectors – said unions were mobilizing members from across Zimbabwe.
“This is strictly a labor issue. We don’t need support from politicians, we are saying hands off to politicians,” he said.
Shortages of foreign currency, fuel and power are among the most visible signs of a crisis that has revived memories of 2008, when hyperinflation wiped out savings and forced the government to abandon its currency.
Mnangagwa says Zimbabweans should be patient while his government pursues economic reforms, including gradually cutting subsidies on fuel and electricity and the re-introduction of the domestic currency.
Three generator units have tripped at Hwange power station.
Zimbabwe’s power utility warned of increased power cuts on Sunday after it lost 251 megawatts from its Hwange power station.
“Three generator units tripped at Hwange power station this morning,” Zimbabwe Electricity Transmission Distribution said on its Twitter account. “Load shedding has now increased significantly and we are now implementing stage 2” power cuts outside the normal schedule.
Blackouts in Zimbabwe already last as much as 18 hours a day and the country spends $23 million monthly on power imports, according to the energy regulator.
The board behind the golden arches is giving Stephen Easterbrook a $37 million Happy Meal with his pink slip.
Say what you will about McDonald’s, but you have to respect a corporation that takes its discarded silly mottos so seriously. In this case “Lovin’ Beats Hatin'”:
Former McDonald’s Corp. Chief Executive Officer Stephen Easterbrook, who was fired for having a relationship with an employee, was allowed to keep stock awards worth more than $37 million as well as $675,000 severance and health insurance benefits.
Easterbrook, 52, will get to keep unvested stock options worth about $23.5 million and possibly benefit from grants of restricted shares tied to the company’s performance that are worth roughly $13.8 million at their target payouts, according to calculations by Bloomberg. He’s also eligible for a pro-rated bonus for his work in fiscal 2019.
Somewhere, Adam Neumann is kicking himself for forgetting to bang a WeWork marketing associate and then telling SoftBank immediately.
While money may be the blood of a company, contracts are definitely its bones: They are the structure that keeps it alive so that the money can flow through. A company’s greatest sources of value — its relationships and its assets — are often stored in contracts. That is why in-house lawyers put so much time, thought, energy, and resources into creating, negotiating, managing, and interpreting them. Whether in sales, vendor initiatives, business development, or other strategic initiatives, contracts form the backbone of any healthy company.
Over the past two decades, cloud technologies have completely transformed how we work. In the process, nimble web-based apps with per-user pricing models and low or no up-front costs have become a norm across other functions. So why do we still negotiate contracts like it’s 1991?
We still draft contracts in MS Word, email them to relevant stakeholders, collect everyone’s revisions, reconcile all revisions into a single document, email the updated version around, and then… repeat the process. Then we struggle with long negotiation cycles, a lack of visibility, and poor process control and compliance. This whole process is like riding a horse and buggy in the age of self-driving cars.
So why modernize your contract negotiation and management process?
1. Efficiency to Increase Your Impact
Today, contract negotiations require a lot of manual, error-prone, clerical work. Sifting through emails and reconciling different revisions into a single document results in longer negotiation cycles, and a protracted negotiation process always leads to a higher risk of losing the deal. Modernizing contract negotiation and management will allow your company to devote more high-value resources to core business functions, like strategic thinking.
2. Visibility to Improve Relationships Across the Company
How long does it take you to answer basic questions for your boss or coworkers about your company? For example, how long will it take for a particular contract to close? How much revenue are we going to book this month? What percentage of contracts include non-standard terms? That is just a start; you can imagine an infinite number of other questions that would be helpful to know the answers to.
With today’s processes, it’s all but impossible to have a certain answer for even these basic questions. What if you wanted to make your contract process 10 percent more efficient? Where would you even begin to have that conversation? Being able to have these intelligent conversations about contracts is not just a luxury; it is increasingly part of normal business conversation.
3. Process Control for Compliance and Risk Management
How can you assure compliance and maintain a robust contracting process if your people are still emailing static documents to each other and to third parties, the same way they did 10 or 20 years ago? Manually checking each contract and cataloging non-standard terms, renewal dates, and other critical information is a mistake-rich exercise because humans make mistakes. Especially, as you know, when they are reading a long contract after a long contract, their eyes glaze over, and their brains are not engaged.
Adopting a robust cloud contract negotiation and management solution will allow you to easily define, enforce, and audit compliance with your company’s official contracting processes. In other words, you will manage risks better, more efficiently, and more systematically.
Once upon a time, cloud contract negotiation and management solutions were the way of the future. We fantasized about alternatives to scrolling through document after document, copying-and-pasting generic terms, printing, signing, and scanning, and then doing it all again when your partner inevitably changes their mind at the last minute. It was once a luxury.
But what was once the way of the future is now a reality. In fact, it’s not just the way of the present — it’s necessary to keep up with modern business expectations. Future contractual partners know what’s possible and will expect it. With a broader range of information available, people want answers. Doing things the old-fashioned way isn’t just slow, inefficient, and annoying. It’s harmful to your business.
Whether you adapt or not, every field incorporates technologies as they come. It’s up to you whether to keep up.
Olga V. Mack is the CEO of Parley Pro, a next-generation contract management company that has pioneered online negotiation technology. Olga embraces legal innovation and had dedicated her career to improving and shaping the future of law. She is convinced that the legal profession will emerge even stronger, more resilient, and more inclusive than before by embracing technology. Olga is also an award-winning general counsel, operations professional, startup advisor, public speaker, adjunct professor, and entrepreneur. Olga founded the Women Serve on Boards movement that advocates for women to participate on corporate boards of Fortune 500 companies. Olga also co-founded SunLaw, an organization dedicated to preparing women in-house attorneys to become general counsels and legal leaders, and WISE to help female law firm partners become rainmakers. She authored Get on Board: Earning Your Ticket to a Corporate Board Seat and Fundamentals of Smart Contract Security. You can email Olga at olga@olgamack.com or follow her on Twitter @olgavmack.
This is the latest article in the monthly “An Interview With” series. In this series,I connect withpeople from all parts of the legal profession and at all stages of their legal career to learn whoreallymakes up the legal community and what they areactuallydoing with their legal degrees.
This month I discussed solo practice issues with estate and small business attorney Erin C. Callahan. Erin is a 2011 graduate of SMU Dedman School of Law and currently runs her own practice in League City, Texas. In this article, Erin shares incredible insight into what it is like to run your own practice and what it takes to do it successfully.
KS: Tell us about your journey to becoming a solo practitioner and small business owner.
EC:In law school, I planned to open my own firm. Famous last words. But then I received an offer that led me to take a 7-year detour in the insurance industry. After seven years, I was done and I went to work for a small general practice. I was exposed to almost all areas of the law — which is ideal if you don’t know what area of law you want to practice. I fell in love with estate planning, and I realized I didn’t like family law or litigation. Therefore, I decided to hang my own shingle and do what I love and what makes me happy.
KS: What do you love about running your own practice and being your own boss? Conversely, what are some challenges that come with being a small business owner?
EC:Running my own law firm is terrifying and exciting all at the same time. I love being my own boss because if I want to buy new software, I buy new software. If I don’t want to work on Friday, I don’t. The freedom and flexibility are invaluable. The biggest challenges are leveling up while still doing good work and running your business. You have to become an expert in marketing, finance, bookkeeping, sales, and so much more. It is challenging to keep all the balls in the air and projects moving forward so outsourcing is critical or you will fall behind. Another challenge is fear and mindset. Pushing yourself as a business owner is different than pushing yourself as an employee. As an employee, your development plan might include attending several conferences, meeting with a coach, or taking a new class. Your development plan as a business owner is taking on new business that you don’t have direct experience with; which can be scary. You have to stay on top of your fear and forge ahead otherwise you will be stagnant. I never experienced fear until owning a business. As Gandhi said, “Your beliefs become your thoughts, your thoughts become your words, your words become your actions, your actions become your habits, your habits become your values, your values become your destiny.”
KS: I know this question is a bit of a trap for business owners, but describe what your typical workday looks like.
EC:It’s probably easier if I describe a typical week because I block my schedule. On Tuesday and Thursday, I am out of the office and I focus on all marketing events — whether that’s speaking engagements, meeting with referral partners (I meet with about 20 a month), or attending several local networking events. I am busy from about 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Monday and Wednesday, I am in the office drafting in the mornings and meeting with clients in the afternoons.
Friday is a free for all. Anything that doesn’t get done earlier in the week gets done on Friday. Usually, I am busy most of the day with drafting or meeting people.
In addition to the law firm, I own another small business on which I spend about 15 hours a week. Generally, from 4:00 to 7:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday, I am tutoring. I work with elementary and middle school students whose parents want them to get ahead in school, need confidence-building, or are struggling in class. It is a blast! It’s different than practicing law. My kids are amazing and every day no matter how bad my day is, I have to put a smile on and be there for them. I end every day laughing and having fun with the kids. I also believe in having multiple streams of income and this business is a second stream of income for our family.
KS: What drives your passion to practice estate planning and business law?
EC:I love estate planning and small business law because I am working with people and not companies. I feel like I am making a difference in their lives. Most people don’t have an estate plan. It’s fun working with them and helping them develop a plan that gives them peace of mind. Second, lifestyle. I don’t have a heavy caseload of litigated cases. I can work whenever or wherever I want, and there is freedom in that. Estate planning and small business law align with my natural strengths. I am empathetic and I get my energy from people. I am also futuristic according to Strengthsfinders, so I naturally have a long-range view towards the future so it’s a good fit. Lastly, I love it because you can keep things simple and do basic wills or challenge yourself intellectually with Medicaid or other highly technical areas of law within estate planning and business law. There is room to grow.
KS: What advice do you have someone who is interested in starting their own legal practice?
EC:First and foremost, just do it! Take an hour every morning and plan out what it will look like for a few weeks. That being said, don’t stress about all the details. It doesn’t really matter what practice management software you buy. Clio, MyCase, or Practice Panther — they all get the job done. Make decisions quickly, and don’t succumb to analysis paralysis. Hire a CPA and bookkeeper early or at least have a clear plan. Make sure you put time into your marketing plan. Most lawyers think they will open the doors and they will come. That is not true. Lawyers are not natural salespeople, and as a law firm owner, you have to be fluent in sales. Lastly, understand that sales is different than being good with people. Know your ideal client and target market.
KS: What, if anything, did you do in law school that you found really helpful in preparing you for solo practice? In retrospect, is there anything you wish you had done differently in law school to be better prepared?
EC:To be candid, I don’t think anything in law school prepares you for opening your own law firm. Maybe working while in school or holding leadership positions does because you learn time management and organization skills. Other than that, take as many writing classes as you can. If your school has classes about running your own law firm or allows you to take business classes in the business school, definitely take those. Also, get as much work experience as possible, so by the end of law school you know what areas you enjoy and what areas you hate. Volunteer, work, offer to work for free — whatever it takes to get exposure to different areas of the law.
Know someone who would be great to profile in this series? Send an email toinfo@vincoprep.comwith “An Interview With” in the subject line.
Kerriann Stout is a millennial law school professor and founder of Vinco (a bar exam coaching company) who is generationally trapped between her students and colleagues. Kerriann has helped hundreds of students survive law school and the bar exam with less stress and more confidence. She lives, works, and writes in the northeast. You can reach her by email at info@vincoprep.com.
— Rep. Justin Amash (I-Mich.), imploring President Donald Trump to brush up on the document that guides the impeachment inquiry that’s been launched against him. Amash was the only non-Democrat in the House to vote in favor of an impeachment inquiry against Trump.
Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.
Like it or not, the internet is gaining access to every aspect of our lives. You may have a smart thermostat in your house that “learns” when you are home so that the temperature in your home can be adjusted when you are away. Your home may also have a smart doorbell (and networked home security cameras) that will track not only visitors, but can track your comings and goings as well. Certain refrigerators now have cameras inside them that can take pictures of the inside to assist you in restocking your groceries. You may be wearing a fitness watch that is tracking not only your steps, heartbeat, and exercise, but your sleep patterns and even diet (should you opt to enter and track such information). You get the point — more and more data is being collected about you than you may admit, but it is the potential compilation of this information and its use that is a bigger deal than you may think.
Let’s face it: Technology is growing at an exponential rate and the “internet of things” is no exception. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines “Internet of Things” as “the networking capability that allows information to be sent to and received from objects and devices (such as fixtures and kitchen appliances) using the Internet.” As I have written previously, more and more elements of this technology have their eyes, ears, and digital fingers on every part of our everyday lives. Although the technology can add value and may, in many cases, make our lives a little easier in the process, the cost to personal privacy cannot be underestimated.
First, let’s address the most obvious point: Each of these devices is collecting data — your data. That is, data about you that you have permitted the device to gather and use according to the privacy policy and the terms of use for the device. For example, the FitBit Privacy Policy not only addresses what they collect about you from their wearable device, but how that information is used and shared, which may include sharing your data with third-party applications and even your employer (for employer wellness programs with which you participate). This is indicative of most every such device that you may be using at home or on your person. Think such third-party application sharing is not a big deal? Think again. Facebook collects at least 98 different data points about its users, and as the Cambridge Analytica scandal of 2018 demonstrated, such data can be used in ways not necessarily agreed to by its users.
Although troubling, at least there is a level of control afforded the user regarding what data is collected and how it is stored and used for each type of device. The bigger issue, however, is the bigger picture presented by all of this data. Much of this data, while collected at the device-level, is actually saved to the “cloud” — a network of computers used by the device company to store such data. This is where things start getting dicey. For example, take the Amazon Echo speaker. This device incorporates a virtual assistant, Alexa, that according to Amazon is its “cloud-based voice service available on more than 100 million devices from Amazon and third-party device manufacturers [with which] you can build natural voice experiences that offer customers a more intuitive way to interact with the technology they use every day.” The problem is that not only does Alexa “listen” to what you ask (and potentially what you are doing), but apparently so are thousands of Amazon employees and contractors to ostensibly improve Alexa’s speech recognition and contextual understanding — they are listening to audio clips that cover not only the mundane, but potentially criminal activity according to one CNN report. You can opt out of such use of your recordings by Amazon; however, history has shown that this may not prevent unauthorized use (e.g., Cambridge Analytica).
This leads us to the biggest issue presented by such data in the “cloud” — the eventual analytics involving such information and compilation of all your collected data by third parties. Think about it: A compilation of your location data from all the IoT devices that you use that can be compiled into a digital representation of you and your daily routine and needs — compiled data that would be digital gold to everyone from advertisers and insurers to hackers. Your smartphone, combined with your smartwatch data and smart refrigerator providing a glimpse of not only how you eat, but what you eat and where you get it. Make no mistake, this is already happening. Unfortunately, the nature of consent in privacy policies does not generally prohibit third-party compilation of data, depriving the individual of control over their data. Further, there is very little that the law addresses in this context in the United States. Although the U.S. seems to be moving in the direction of the EU’s GDPR (as evidenced by California’s CCPA and other state laws following suit), the patchwork of state laws is simply not enough.
All of the foregoing leads me to reiterate the need for meaningful federal privacy legislation in the U.S. Let’s just hope that somehow Congress and business can resolve this dilemma in a way that is a win for personal data privacy. Given the current political climate, however, there seems to be little hope of progress on that front anytime soon. In the interim, an inadequate patchwork of state laws will be all we have to remain reactive to the ongoing march of technology. Make no mistake, a Pandora’s Box for privacy has been opened by these technological advancements, and it simply cannot be closed again. Let’s just hope we can keep the lid from flying off in the process.
Tom Kulik is an Intellectual Property & Information Technology Partner at the Dallas-based law firm of Scheef & Stone, LLP. In private practice for over 20 years, Tom is a sought-after technology lawyer who uses his industry experience as a former computer systems engineer to creatively counsel and help his clients navigate the complexities of law and technology in their business. News outlets reach out to Tom for his insight, and he has been quoted by national media organizations. Get in touch with Tom on Twitter (@LegalIntangibls) or Facebook (www.facebook.com/technologylawyer), or contact him directly at tom.kulik@solidcounsel.com.
After a confusing few weeks, the deal is done. Here’s what we know.
On Friday morning, Authentic Brands Group officially became the new owner of Barneys New York in a $271 million deal that is expected to result in the closure of most if not all stores.
It’s been quite a year for Barneys. One minute the 96-year-old luxury store is opening a (literal) high-end cannabis department and the next it’s facing the very real possibility of closing its doors for good. Reports surfaced that the retailer was planning to restructure and was considering a bankruptcy filing in July, and it officially filed in August. Since then, it feels like there have been near-daily headlines touting nine-figure bids from investors to acquire the chain and declarations that it will close all seven of its locations.
To help you unravel what may have been Barneys’ final days in business, we created a timeline of everything that’s happened since that bankruptcy filing, what it’s meant, and what is likely happening next.
Barneys Files for Bankruptcy
Pushed into financial distress by rising rents — especially at its Madison Avenue flagship, where rent had reportedly doubled to $30 million — and competition from Net-a-Porter and the like, Barneys filled for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Tuesday, August 6, effectively putting itself up for sale. In its filings, it was revealed that Barneys owed millions of dollars to many of the luxury brands it carries, including $3.7 million to The Row and $2.7 million to Celine.
It gets financing to buy some time, but closes some stores
On the same day it filed for bankruptcy, Barneys secured a $218 million lifeline from Brigade Capital Management, $75 million of which it was granted immediate access to. As part of that deal, it closed five stores and seven off-price Warehouse locations, leaving five locations — including Madison Ave and Beverly Hills — open alongside its e-commerce channels Barneys.com and Barneyswarehouse.com. Barneys was also given an October deadline to find a buyer or liquidate.
Barneys announces its doors are still open
In early September, Barneys poked fun at its own bankruptcy with clever, tongue-in-cheek window campaign signs at its Madison Avenue flagship declaring “Not Closed” and “Barneys Til I’m Dead.”
“Barneys has never been more relatable than it is right now,” High Snobiety editor-in-chief Thom Bettridge, who helped create the campaign, told GQ, adding that “financial distress is a common American trope.”
During bankruptcy proceedings, a bidder emerges
Authentic Brands Group was seen as a a strong contender to buy Barneys from the beginning, but there was always time for someone else to swoop in. Others who were rumored to be considering bids included Kith backer Sam Ben-Avraham, Nordstrom Inc. and Neiman Marcus parent company Ares. ABG, which owns a number of brands in fashion and retail including Juicy Couture and Nine West, said as early as September that it was interested in putting forth a bid. It did just that, and on Oct. 16, Barneys filed papers agreeing to sell its assets to ABG for roughly $271 million. This designated ABG as the stalking-horse bidder, meaning it would act as a reserve bid ahead of the official auction. Its plan would likely include the closure of all Barneys retail stores. Still, nothing is set in stone.
Another bidder emerges with hopes of saving Barneys
Shortly thereafter, Ben-Avraham launched a public campaign to raise the capital needed to make a bid for Barneys, making a plea on the now-defunct site SaveBarneys.com promising “a solution that doesn’t involve mass layoffs and store closures.” Others who were reportedly still putting together bids in late October included Steve Madden and former Istithmar CEO David Jackson.
ABG wins the auction
On Oct. 24, ABG put out a press release announcing that it had “emerged as the successful bidder to purchase the intellectual property of Barneys New York (Barneys).” Confirming the deal had been in motion for some time, the release outlined ABG’s plans for Barneys, which would focus on “high fashion collaborations, namesake products, lively dining, and premium shopping experiences.” It would also make Saks Fifth Avenue “the retail partner for the brand in the U.S. and Canada,” suggesting that while Barneys standalone stores would close, it will have some sort of presence in Saks stores through a licensing partnership.
“As we explore opportunities for the brand as part of Saks Fifth Avenue, we are working to best understand what Barneys’ customers love about the retailer as we evolve it into a new interpretation that is relevant for today’s luxury consumer,” said said Marc Metrick, President of Saks Fifth Avenue, in a statement.
The sale was still subject to final approval from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, meaning, technically, another bidder might have had a shot if they came in with a better deal.
The court approves ABG’s bid, but it’s not set in stone
This did not happen, however. Ben-Avraham’s bid was ultimately too low to qualify. On Oct. 31, the bankruptcy court approved ABG’s $271 million bid, with the sale expected to close at 10 a.m. the following day.
“I think we can all agree this is a very sad day,” the judge, Cecelia G. Morris, said at the end of the hearing, according to The New York Times.
Still, according to Forbes, Barneys sent out a statement saying other bidders could still come forward, suggesting Barneys’ camp was not too thrilled with ABG’s offer and plans.
“Over the past several months, we have worked diligently with the court, our lenders and creditors to maximize the value of Barneys in this sale process,” the statement reportedly said, “and we continue to work with all relevant parties towards the best solution for Barneys’ employees, designers and vendors, and customers.”
Barneys creditors also resisted ABG’s bid in support of the chain’s many retail and distribution center workers who would lose their jobs if said bid went through.
The deal is done as rival bids fail to materialize
It appears that Ben-Avraham was still trying to put together a last-minute bid to save Barneys, but made the decision Thursday night to pull out of the race. “This was one of the hardest decisions I have made in my life thus far,” he wrote in an Instagram caption. “Unfortunately, we failed to convince enough people in the business community that it made economic sense to keep Barneys alive.”
Jackson was also reportedly trying to put forth a last-minute bid with help from Arabian Oud, the largest fragrance retailer in the Middle East, but “couldn’t get there by 10” according to the New York Post.
Also according to the Post, Barneys CEO Danielle Vitale officially stepped down on Friday morning.
ABG confirmed that its acquisition was finalized in a press release sent on Friday.
What’s next?
In the immediate term, The New York Times wrote Thursday: “The result could be eye-popping liquidation sales of luxury goods like handbags and dresses at all seven Barneys locations, perhaps starting as soon as this weekend.”
Longer term, according to Friday’s announcement, Barneys will end up with at least one store. “ABG will leverage its international scale, marketing expertise, and network of best-in-class partners to grow Barneys New York’s global presence across retail, including pop-ups, shop-in-shops, eCommerce, and a new freestanding store in a key U.S. market. There is a vision to create multisensory experiences that will usher Barneys New York into a new era while staying true to the brand’s DNA.” It also notes that “expanding international retail in both brick and mortar and eCommerce” will be a priority, and that Fred’s, Barneys’ dining concept, could also expand internationally.
As for the Saks Fifth Avenue partnership, there will be a “reboot” of Barneys on the fifth floor of Saks’ New York flagship, which will be the first of several Barneys shop-in-shops within Saks locations in the U.S. and Canada.
As for Barneys’ iconic Madison Avenue flagship, ABG says it will evolve the location into “a pop-up retail experience, bringing together an eclectic curation of boutiques, art and cultural installations and exhibits, and entertainment that fosters creativity and community.”
Barneys’ 12 stores in Japan, which are operated by Seven & I Holdings through a licensing agreement, will remain open.
The liquidation of inventory and other assets will likely be handled by B. Riley, ABG’s partner in the deal, while ABG will handle the licensing of the Barneys brand. It is not clear how long the remaining Barneys stores will keep their doors open.
While a legendary sale — and who doesn’t love a sale — could be imminent, the industry will surely be mourning the loss of an iconic retail institution for some time. And many Barneys employees will likely be mourning their jobs.
Reps for Barneys did not immediately respond to our requests for comment. We will update this story as we learn more.
Note: this story was updated to include new details from ABG regarding the acquisition.