POLICE LOG for December 27 Vehicle Rollover Septic Tank Overflow Driver Disappears

first_imgWILMINGTON, MA — Here are highlights from the Wilmington Police Log for Thursday, December 27, 2018:State Police and Fire Department responded to a vehicle rollover with entrapment on 93 North, near Exit 41. (2:51am)2-vehicle crash on Lowell Street resulting in one being transported by the Fire Department. Airbag deployed. One vehicle towed. (8:05am)Andover Police reported a road rage incident. Operator of U-Haul pick-up truck approached a party with a sledge hammer on Ballardvale Street. Unknown direction of travel. Police unable to locate. (10:19am)A Lawrence Court homeowner reported a package was taken from their mailbox on December 23. (12:15pm)Fire Department responded to brush fire in media on 93 South. (2:39pm)A Draper Drive caller reported a vehicle was running for about an hour across from her house with no one inside. Police investigated and spoke with mother of vehicle owner. Son forgot to shut it off before heading to the mall with his friends. (3:35pm)A resident reported a blue pickup truck struck their fence, trash barrels, and a school zone sign before taking off towards Salem Street. Part of bumper left behind. Tewksbury Police notified. DPW notified. (9:01pm)Septic tank at NuPath on Woburn Street was overflowing, causing water to flow into the roadway, creating icy conditions. DPW notified. (11:23pm)(DISCLAIMER: This information is public information.  An arrest does not constitute a conviction.  Any arrested person is innocent until proven guilty.)Like Wilmington Apple on Facebook. Follow Wilmington Apple on Twitter. Follow Wilmington Apple on Instagram. Subscribe to Wilmington Apple’s daily email newsletter HERE. Got a comment, question, photo, press release, or news tip? Email wilmingtonapple@gmail.com.Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading… RelatedPOLICE LOG for August 31: Woburn Man Arrested For OUI; Bad Highway Crash Required MedflightIn “Police Log”POLICE LOG for August 11: Incidents Not What They Seem; Marijuana Confiscated From Vehicle; Missing Woman FoundIn “Police Log”POLICE LOG for August 4: Lowell Man Arrested On Warrant; Bad Crash In Front Of Rocco’s; Syringe FoundIn “Police Log”last_img read more

Boeing details fixes to get 737 Max flying again

first_img Comment Now playing: Watch this: Tags 32 Photos Boeing said the fixes will “reduce the crew’s workload in non-normal flight situations and prevent erroneous data from causing MCAS activation.” Among them:MCAS will now compare inputs from two sensors, instead of just one. (The system is activated by angle-of-attack sensors near the airplane’s nose.)If the sensors disagree by 5.5 degrees or more, MCAS will not automatically activate. According to a preliminary report from the first crash in October, a faulty AOA sensor was sending incorrect information to MCAS.An indicator on the flight deck display will alert the pilots when the sensors disagree. Until now, Boeing sold a warning light alerting pilots to a fault as part of an optional package of equipment. The aircraft involved in the first crash did not have that light installed.MCAS will kick in only one time if it determines an aircraft’s nose is too high. Also, MCAS will never move the horizontal stabilizer (the flight surface on the tailplane that moves an aircraft up and down) with more force than the pilot can exert on the control column. Both crash investigations show the planes oscillated several times before crashing, indicating that the system activated several times even after pilots recovered from the dives.Flight crews will need 21 or more days of instructor-led and simulator training on the 737 Max, including interacting with MCAS, before they can fly the aircraft. Boeing and the FAA are facing charges that current 737 Max pilot training did not mention the system in order to minimize the cost and time of certifying pilots. That training is now the focus of multiple investigations including one by Congress, which opened a hearing Wednesday.Boeing didn’t give a timeline for the changes or say when the 737 Max, which remains grounded around the world, might carry passengers again. Before that can happen, the FAA and aviation safety agencies in other countries will need to certify the fixes as safe. Airlines will then need to install them and retrain crews. A 747 story: The history of the jumbo jet 1 Share your voicecenter_img Aviation Boeing “The 737 family is a safe airplane family. And the 737 Max builds on that tremendous history of safety that we’ve seen for the last 50 years,” he said. “We’re working with customers and regulators around the world to restore faith in our industry and also to reaffirm our commitment to safety.”Though the official causes of both accidents have not been determined, investigators have found clear similarities. Under scrutiny is a flight control system called MCAS (for Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) that pushes the 737 Max’s nose down when it determines that it’s too high. Preliminary data from both crashes show that flight crews struggled to take control as the airplanes continually dove just after takeoff.  Eager to assure airlines and passengers that its best-selling airplane is safe, Boeing on Wednesday announced how it will update a flight control system that’s at the center of investigations into crashes in Ethiopia and Indonesia that killed 346 people.Speaking at the company’s 737 factory in Renton, Washington, Boeing executive Mike Sinnett opened the briefing by expressing sympathy for the victims of both crashes and for their families.  2:33 Tech Industry How United Airlines prepares a Boeing 777 between flightslast_img read more

Road rage Reckless bus mows down 5yrold at Nagerbazar

first_imgKolkata: Two persons including a five-year-old girl died in the city in two separate accidents in Nagerbazar and Chinar Park.The traffic at Nagerbazar came to a halt on Tuesday as local people put up a blockade after a five-year-old girl was crushed under the wheels of the bus in which she was travelling. Immediately after the incident, the locals got agitated, protesting against the death of the child due to rash and negligent driving. The girl, identified as Anushka Kar, was a resident of Kalindi near Lake Town and studied at a local English medium school in class one. Also Read – Bose & Gandhi: More similar than apart, says Sugata BoseOn Tuesday morning, the five-year-old had boarded a private bus while travelling to her school, accompanied by her mother. Witnesses said that as soon as the mother-daughter duo got down at Kajipara near Nagerbazar, the bus increased its speed at an alarming rate and before the child could move from the spot, the rear wheels of the bus crushed her underneath. The child was immediately taken to a nearby hospital, where the doctors declared her brought dead. Also Read – Rs 13,000 crore investment to provide 2 lakh jobs: MamataAfter the incident, local people took to protests in anger over the incident, blocking the road. But even after the police arrived at the spot, the locals refused to withdraw the blockade. Eventually, an altercation erupted between police and the protesters. The locals complained that although the vehicles move recklessly in the area during the wee hours, the police have not taken any adequate measure. The footpath has been taken away by the hawkers, leaving no sidewalk for the pedestrians. The area has become an accident-prone zone as a result. The protesters further claimed that if no action is taken to ensure the safety of common people, the blockade will continue. A resident of the area said: “The little child died as the driver drove the bus in an extremely reckless manner. Exemplary punishment should be given to the perpetrator. Police need to be strict against the rash drivers.” Although police seized the bus which mowed down the child, the driver had managed to escape. The condition in the area later returned to normal in the evening, as the locals ceased their protests. In another incident, at around 3.45 am on Tuesday, a truck which was coming from New Town rammed into another smaller truck, arriving from the Rajarhat Road at Chinar Park, resulting in the death of one person, leaving seven others injured. The injured were later admitted to a local hospital in New Town. The deceased has been identified as a resident of the Basirhat area, a 30-year-old man identified as Bablu Mondal, who succumbed to his injuries at the hospital. Both the vehicles have been detained. A case of causing death by negligence has been initiated.last_img read more

Effective Product Development needs developers and product managers collaborating on success metrics

first_imgModern product development is witnessing a drastic shift. Disruptive ideas and ambiguous business conditions have changed the way products are developed. Product development is no longer guided by existing processes or predefined frameworks. Delivering on time is a baseline metric, as is software quality. Today, businesses are competing to innovate. They are willing to invest in groundbreaking products with cutting-edge technology. Cost is no longer the constraint—execution is. Can product managers then continue to rely upon processes and practices aimed at traditional ways of product building? How do we ensure that software product builders look at the bigger picture and do not tie themselves to engineering practices and technology viability alone? Understanding the business and customer context is essential for creating valuable products. In this article, we are going to identify what success means to us in terms of product development. This article is an excerpt from the book Lean Product Management written by Mangalam Nandakumar. For the kind of impact that we predict our feature idea to have on the Key Business Outcomes, how do we ensure that every aspect of our business is aligned to enable that success? We may also need to make technical trade-offs to ensure that all effort on building the product is geared toward creating a satisfying end-to-end product experience. When individual business functions take trade-off decisions in silo, we could end up creating a broken product experience or improvising the product experience where no improvement is required. For a business to be able to align on trade-offs that may need to be made on technology, it is important to communicate what is possible within business constraints and also what is not achievable. It is not necessary for the business to know or understand the specific best practices, coding practices, design patterns, and so on, that product engineering may apply. However, the business needs to know the value or the lack of value realization, of any investment that is made in terms of costs, effort, resources, and so on. The section addresses the following topics: The need to have a shared view of what success means for a feature idea Defining the right kind of success criteria Creating a shared understanding of technical success criteria “If you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. We have to go far — quickly.” Al Gore Planning for success doesn’t come naturally to many of us. Come to think of it, our heroes are always the people who averted failure or pulled us out of a crisis. We perceive success as ‘not failing,’ but when we set clear goals, failures don’t seem that important. We can learn a thing or two about planning for success by observing how babies learn to walk. The trigger for walking starts with babies getting attracted to, say, some object or person that catches their fancy. They decide to act on the trigger, focusing their full attention on the goal of reaching what caught their fancy. They stumble, fall, and hurt themselves, but they will keep going after the goal. Their goal is not about walking. Walking is a means to reaching the shiny object or the person calling to them. So, they don’t really see walking without falling      as a measure of success. Of course, the really smart babies know to wail their way to getting the said shiny thing without lifting a toe. Somewhere along the way, software development seems to have forgotten about shiny objects, and instead focused on how to walk without falling. In a way, this has led to an obsession with following processes without applying them to the context and writing perfect code, while disdaining and undervaluing supporting business practices. Although technology is a great enabler, it is not the end in itself. When applied in the context of running a business or creating social impact, technology cannot afford to operate as an isolated function. This is not to say that technologists don’t care about impact. Of course, we do. Technologists show a real passion for solving customer problems. They want their code to change lives, create impact, and add value. However, many technologists underestimate the importance of supporting business functions in delivering value. I have come across many developers who don’t appreciate the value of marketing, sales, or support. In many cases, like the developer who spent a year perfecting his code without acquiring a single customer, they believe that beautiful code that solves the right problem is enough to make a business succeed. Nothing can be further from the truth Most of this type of thinking is the result of treating technology as an isolated function. There is a significant gap that exists between nontechnical folks and software engineers. On the one hand, nontechnical folks don’t understand the possibilities, costs, and limitations of software technology. On the other hand, technologists don’t value the need for supporting functions and communicate very little about the possibilities and limitations of technology. This expectation mismatch often leads to unrealistic goals and a widening gap between technology teams and the supporting functions. The result of this widening gap is often cracks opening in the end-to-end product experience for the customer, thereby resulting in a loss of business. Bridging this gap of expectation mismatch requires that technical teams and business functions communicate in the same language, but first they must communicate. Setting SMART goals for team In order to set the right expectations for outcomes, we need the collective wisdom of the entire team. We need to define and agree upon what success means for each feature and to each business function. This will enable teams to set up the entire product experience for success. Setting specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound (SMART) metrics can resolve this. We cannot decouple our success criteria from the impact scores we arrived at earlier. So, let’s refer to the following table for the ArtGalore digital art gallery: The estimated impact rating was an indication of how much impact  the business expected a feature idea to have on the Key Business Outcomes. If you recall, we rated this on a scale of 0 to 10. When the estimated impact of a Key Business Outcomes is less than five, then the success criteria for that feature is likely to be less ambitious. For example, the estimated impact of “existing buyers can enter a lucky draw to meet an artist of the month” toward generating revenue is zero. What this means is that we don’t expect this feature idea to bring in any revenue for us or put in another way, revenue is not the measure of success for this feature idea. If any success criteria for generating revenue does come up for this feature idea, then there is a clear mismatch in terms of how we have prioritized the feature itself. For any feature idea with an estimated impact of five or above, we need to get very specific about how to define and measure success. For instance, the feature idea “existing buyers can enter a lucky draw to meet an artist of the month” has an estimated impact rating of six towards engagement. This means that we expect an increase in engagement as a measure of success for this feature idea. Then, we need to define what “increase in engagement” means. My idea of “increase in engagement” can be very different from your idea of “increase in engagement.” This is where being S.M.A.R.T. about our definition of success can be useful. Success metrics are akin to user story acceptance criteria. Acceptance criteria define what conditions must be fulfilled by the software in order for us to sign off on the success of the user story. Acceptance criteria usually revolve around use cases and acceptable functional flows. Similarly, success criteria for feature ideas must define what indicators can tell us that the feature is delivering the expected impact on the KBO. Acceptance criteria also sometimes deal with NFRs (nonfunctional requirements). NFRs include performance, security, and reliability. In many instances, nonfunctional requirements are treated as independent user stories. I also have seen many teams struggle with expressing the need for nonfunctional requirements from a customer’s perspective. In the early days of writing user stories, the tendency for myself and most of my colleagues was to write NFRs from a system/application point of view. We would say, “this report must load in 20 seconds,” or “in the event of a network failure, partial data must not be saved.”  These functional specifications didn’t tell us how/why they were important for an end user. Writing user stories forces us to think about the user’s perspective. For example, in my team we used to have interesting conversations about why a report needed to load within 20 seconds. This compelled us to think about how the user interacted with our software. It is not uncommon for visionary founders to throw out very ambitious goals for success. Having ambitious goals can have a positive impact in motivating teams to outperform. However, throwing lofty targets around, without having a plan for success, can be counter-productive. For instance, it’s rather ambitious to say, “Our newsletter must be the first to publish artworks by all the popular artists in the country,” or that “Our newsletter must become the benchmark for art curation.” These are really inspiring words, but can mean nothing if we don’t have a plan to get there. The general rule of thumb for this part of product experience planning is that when we aim for an ambitious goal, we also sign up to making it happen. Defining success must be a collaborative exercise carried out by all stakeholders. This is the playing field for deciding where we can stretch our goals, and for everyone to agree on what we’re signing up to, in order to set the product experience up for success. Defining key success metrics For every feature idea we came up with, we can create feature cards that look like the following sample. This card indicates three aspects about what success means for this feature. We are asking these questions: what are we validating? When do we validate this? What Key Business Outcomes does it help us to validate? The criteria for success demonstrates what the business anticipates as being a tangible outcome from a feature. It also demonstrates which business functions will support, own, and drive the execution of the feature. That’s it! We’ve nailed it, right? Wrong. Success metrics must be SMART, but how specific is the specific? The preceding success metric indicates that 80% of those who sign up for the monthly art catalog will enquire about at least one artwork. Now, 80% could mean 80 people, 800 people, or 8000 people, depending on whether we get 100 sign-ups, 1000, or 10,000, respectively! We have defined what external (customer/market) metrics to look for, but we have not defined whether we can realistically achieve this goal, given our resources and capabilities. The question we need to ask is: are we (as a business) equipped to handle 8000 enquiries? Do we have the expertise, resources, and people to manage this? If we don’t plan in advance and assign ownership, our goals can lead to a gap in the product experience. When we clarify this explicitly, each business function could make assumptions. When we say 80% of folks will enquire about one artwork, the sales team is thinking that around 50 people will enquire. This is what the sales team  at ArtGalore is probably equipped to handle. However, marketing is aiming for 750 people and the developers are planning for 1000 people. So, even if we can attract 1000 enquiries, sales can handle only 50 enquiries a month! If this is what we’re equipped for today, then building anything more could be wasteful. We need to think about how we can ramp up the sales team to handle more requests. The idea of drilling into success metrics is to gauge whether we’re equipped to handle our success. So, maybe our success metric should be that we expect to get about 100 sign-ups in the first three months and between 40-70 folks enquiring about artworks after they sign up. Alternatively, we can find a smart way to enable sales to handle higher sales volumes. Before we write up success metrics, we should be asking a whole truckload of questions that determine the before-and-after of the feature. We need to ask the following questions: What will the monthly catalog showcase? How many curated art items will be showcased each month? What is the nature of the content that we should showcase? Just good high-quality images and text, or is there something more? Who will put together the catalog? How long must this person/team(s) spend to create this catalog? Where will we source the art for curation? Is there a specific date each month when the newsletter needs     to go out? Why do we think 80% of those who sign up will enquire? Is it because of the exclusive nature of art? Is it because of the quality of presentation? Is it because of the timing? What’s so special about our catalog? Who handles the incoming enquiries? Is there a number to call    or is it via email? How long would we take to respond to enquiries? If we get 10,000 sign-ups and receive 8000 enquiries, are we equipped to handle these? Are these numbers too high? Can we still meet our response time if we hit those numbers? Would we still be happy if we got only 50% of folks who sign up enquiring? What if it’s 30%? When would we throw away the idea of the catalog? This is where the meat of feature success starts taking shape. We  need a plan to uncover underlying assumptions and set ourselves up for success. It’s very easy for folks to put out ambitious metrics without understanding the before-and-after of the work involved in meeting that metric. The intent of a strategy should be to set teams up for success, not for failure. Often, ambitious goals are set without considering whether they are realistic and achievable or not. This is so detrimental that teams eventually resort to manipulating the metrics or misrepresenting them, playing the blame game, or hiding information. Sometimes teams try to meet these metrics by deprioritizing other stuff. Eventually, team morale, productivity, and delivery take a hit. Ambitious goals, without the required capacity, capability, and resources to deliver, are useless. Technology to be in line with business outcomes Every business function needs to align toward the Key Business Outcomes and conform to the constraints under which the business operates. In our example here, the deadline is for the business to launch this feature idea before the Big Art show. So, meeting timelines is already a necessary measure of success. The other indicators of product technology measures could be quality, usability, response times, latency, reliability, data privacy, security, and so on. These are traditionally clubbed under NFRs (nonfunctional requirements). They are indicators of how the system has been designed or how the system operates, and are not really about user behavior. There is no aspect of a product that is nonfunctional or without a bearing on business outcomes. In that sense, nonfunctional requirements are a misnomer. NFRs are really technical success criteria. They are also a business stakeholder’s decision, based on what outcomes the business wants to pursue. In many time and budget-bound software projects, technical success criteria trade-offs happen without understanding the business context or thinking about the end-to-end product experience. Let’s take an example: our app’s performance may be okay when handling 100 users, but it could take a hit when we get to 10,000 users. By then, the business has moved on to other priorities and the product isn’t ready to make the leap. This depends on how each team can communicate the impact of doing or not doing something today in terms of a cost tomorrow. What that means is that engineering may be able to create software that can scale to 5000 users with minimal effort, but in order to scale to 500,000 users, there’s a different level of magnitude required. There is a different approach needed when building solutions for meeting short-term benefits, compared to how we might build systems for long-term benefits. It is not possible to generalize and make a case that just because we build an application quickly, that it is likely to be full of defects or that it won’t be secure. By contrast, just because we build a lot of robustness into an application, this does not mean that it will make the product sell better. There is a cost to building something, and there is also a cost to not building something and a cost to a rework. The cost will be justified based on the benefits we can reap, but it is important for product technology and business stakeholders to align on the loss or gain in terms of the end-to-end product experience because of the technical approach we are taking today. In order to arrive at these decisions, the business does not really need to understand design patterns, coding practices, or the nuanced technology details. They need to know the viability to meet business outcomes. This viability is based on technology possibilities, constraints, effort, skills needed, resources (hardware and software), time, and other prerequisites. What we can expect and what we cannot expect must both be agreed upon. In every scope-related discussion, I have seen that there are better insights and conversations when we highlight what the business/customer does not get from this product release. When we only highlight what value they will get, the discussions tend to go toward improvising on that value. When the business realizes what it doesn’t get, the discussions lean toward improvising the end-to-end product experience. Should a business care that we wrote unit tests? Does the business care what design patterns we used or what language or software we used? We can have general guidelines for healthy and effective ways to follow best practices within our lines of work, but best practices don’t define us, outcomes do. To summarize we learned before commencing on the development of any feature idea, there must be a consensus on what outcomes we are seeking to achieve. The success metrics should be our guideline for finding the smartest way to implement a feature. Read Next: Developer’s guide to Software architecture patterns Hey hey, I wanna be a Rockstar (Developer) The developer-tester face-off needs to end. It’s putting our projects at risklast_img read more

How to create your own R package with RStudio Tutorial

first_imgIn this tutorial, we will look at the process of creating your own R package. If you are going to create code and put it into production, it’s always a good idea to create a package with version control, examples, and other features. Plus, with RStudio, it is easy to do. So, we will use a simple example with one small function to show how easy it is. This tutorial is an excerpt taken from the book Mastering Machine Learning with R – Third Edition written by Cory Lesmeister. The book explores expert techniques for solving data analytics and covers machine learning challenges that can help you gain insights from complex projects and power up your applications. Before getting started, you will need to load two packages: > install.packages(“roxygen2”)> install.packages(“devtools”) You now want to open File in RStudio and select New Project, which will put you at this point: Select a new directory as desired, and specify R Package, as shown in the following screenshot: You will now name your package – I’ve innovatively called this one package – and select Create Project: Go to your Files tab in RStudio and you should see several files populated like this: Notice the folder called R. That is where we will put the R functions for our package. But first, click on Description and fill it out accordingly, and save it. Here is my version, which will be a function to code all missing values in a dataframe to zero: I’ve left imports and suggests blank. This is where you would load other packages, such as tidyverse or caret. Now, open up the hello.R function in the R folder, and delete all of it. The following format will work nicely: Title: Your package title of course Description: A brief description Param: The parameters for that function; the arguments Return: The values returned Examples: Provide any examples of how to use the function Export: Here, write the function you desire Here is the function for our purposes, which just turns all NAs to zero: You will now go to Build – Configure Build Tools and you should end up here: Click the checkmark for Generate documentation with Roxygen. Doing so will create this popup, which you can close and hit OK. You probably want to rename your function now from hello.R to something relevant. Now comes the moment of truth to build your package. Do this by clicking Build – Clean and Rebuild. Now you can search for your package, and it should appear: Click on it and go through the documentation: There you have it, a useless package, but think of what you can do by packaging your own or your favorite functions, and anyone who inherits your code will thank you. In this tutorial, we went through the process of creating an R package, which can help you and your team put your code into production. We created one user-defined function for our package, but your only limit is your imagination. I hope you’ve enjoyed it and can implement the methods in here, as well as other methods you learn over time. If you want to learn other concepts of Machine Learning with R, be sure to check out the book Mastering Machine Learning with R – Third Edition. Read Next How to make machine learning based recommendations using Julia [Tutorial] The rise of machine learning in the investment industry GitHub Octoverse: top machine learning packages, languages, and projects of 2018last_img read more

Macomb County lawmakers laud bill addressing local pollution

first_img13Dec Macomb County lawmakers laud bill addressing local pollution Budget measure key step in dealing with health threat The five Republican legislators representing Macomb County residents today applauded House passage of a budget bill to address the emerging threat posed by a type of chemical contaminant identified in the Clinton River and Lake St. Clair.State Reps. Diana Farrington, Pamela Hornberger, Peter Lucido, Steve Marino and Jeff Yaroch all voted for the supplemental budget bill to provide testing, monitoring and technical assistance at more than a dozen sites across Michigan where per- and polyfouorakyl substances (PFAS) have been found in groundwater.“I think this funding is essential to ensure the health, safety and welfare of our Macomb County communities,” said Marino, of Harrison Township, whose district includes the lake, river and Selfridge Air Base. “Although Selfridge is not one of the sites identified as polluted, I am certain it will be added to the list because of the fire-suppression chemicals that have been used there for years. We need to proactively mitigate this pollution and protect families in our communities.”The bill also funds improvements to the state’s water-testing laboratory, which does not have the capacity to test for PFAS.“Water testing is done out of state and it can take up to eight weeks for families across the state to get results,” said Farrington, of Utica. “That’s simply unacceptable. Our families deserve to have results in a more immediate manner.”Hornberger, of Chesterfield Township, said she is pleased the bill requires the party causing the pollution to pay for clean-up.“The legislation requires any private or public entity responsible for PFAS contamination, including the federal Department of Defense, to reimburse the state,” Hornberger said.Lucido, of Shelby Township, said he believes the locations identified as being polluted as only the tip of the iceberg.“PFAS are found not only in fire suppressants, but have been used in hundreds of industrial applications and consumer products such as carpeting, apparels, upholstery, food paper wrappings, and metal plating,” Lucido said. “Unfortunately, I think the contamination is more widespread than we first believed.”Yaroch, of Richmond, said it is vital not only to protect the health of families throughout the state, but also to preserve our natural resources.“Addressing contaminants and protecting our lakes and rivers is a top priority,” Yaroch said.The bill now goes to the governor for consideration.#####The supplemental bill is House Bill 4320.center_img Categories: Lucido News,Newslast_img read more

Multimedia Polska is beginning the integration of

first_imgMultimedia Polska is beginning the integration of Stream, the service it provider it agreed to acquire last year, and says it has identified additional synergies from the merger.The addition of Stream’s 99,000 subscribers to Multimedia Polska’s 728,000 as a result of the PLN153 million (€35 million) deal will give the operator a base of 827,000 or 1.668 million revenue-generating units, and 1.4 million homes passed, making it the country’s second largest operator.Mulimedia Polska said it planned to offer its full range of services to Stream’s customers, including broadband speeds of up to 120Mbps and its full range of digital TV services.Multimedia Polska president Andrzej Rogowski said the company had calculated it would not incur significant additional expenditure to upgrade Stream’s networks to offer its services.last_img read more

Sky Deutschland is ontarget to become EBITDA posi

first_imgSky Deutschland is on-target to become EBITDA positive for the first time this year, benefitting from an increasingly “down-market” free-to-air market in country, according to vice president of on-demand programming Peter Schulz. Speaking at the Connected TV World Summit in London, Schulz said that Sky Deutschland still has a lot of potential to grow, with 3.4 million households subscribing to the service out of 38 million pay TV households, adding that Sky’s on-demand services are adding value to its core linear product and are helping it to “speak to a new type of customer.”“For the first time in history, we’re confident that this year on a yearly basis we will become EBITDA positive. So we’re on a turning point and we’re right in the middle of that new era of television,” said Schulz.“As many of you will know, for many years pay TV has struggled in Germany and there’s still a well established universe of free-to-air channels, operated by public broadcasters – two major private channel groups and of course a big variety of independent channels on top of that. These channels are all fighting each other for market share, but in that respect they seem to be placing their bets on volume, not so much on quality programming,” he added.Schulz said that while ad spend has not increased over the last couple of years, channel numbers keep increasing meaning that “content is spreading thinner across more channels.”“The trend is obvious. Free-to-air is even more down-market than ever before. And even though there are more channels to choose from, the value perception of the proposition of free-to-air television seems less compelling, which drives even more people to quality pay services,” he said.last_img read more

European antitrust watchdog the European Commissio

first_imgEuropean antitrust watchdog the European Commission will reportedly review Liberty Global’s agreed takeover of Dutch cable operator Ziggo.According to a Wall Street Journal report, the regulator has been formally notified of the deal and has until April 23 to either approve it or launch a more detailed investigation.The European Commission can also choose to refer the agreement to national authorities, with the Dutch competition authority already indicating it would like to take over on national interest grounds, said the WSJ.Liberty Global agreed to buy Ziggo, in a deal that values the Dutch cable operator at roughly €10 billion, at the end of January.last_img

Eurosport has struck a deal with Frances Ligue Na

first_imgEurosport has struck a deal with France’s Ligue Nationale de Rugby to secure exclusive international rights to the French rugby union Pro D2 league.Eurosport already holds domestic rights to the championship. The latest agreement will enable it to deliver all matches in French rugby union’s second tier league live to European markets through its OTT platform, Eurosport Player. In Asia-Pacific Pro D2 will be broadcast live on the Group’s channels.“I’m delighted by today’s announcement which reinforces our ongoing strategy of delivering the highest quality live sports programming across all our platforms,” said Peter Hutton, chief executive of Eurosport Group.“By making Pro D2 matches available on the Eurosport Player, we are significantly enhancing our OTT offer, which already includes some of the world’s most exciting sports.   And in Asia-Pacific, where we are committed to developing our content portfolio, Pro D2 is the perfect complement to the existing rugby offer which currently includes rugby union Top 14.”last_img read more