Wells Fargo CEO Steps Down

It was probably just a matter of time. Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf announced his retirement in the wake of a bank scandal that brought the CEO in front of the federal government  and brought the company millions of dollars in fines. Stumpf will walk away with about $134 million as his retirement package (although no additional severance pay). According to The Wall Street Journal, the board didn't try to convince Stumpf to continue on.

In a news release, the company included quotations from Stumpf and from the new executives. Stumpf quote read, "I am grateful for the opportunity to have led Wells Fargo. I am also very optimistic about its future, because of our talented and caring team members and the goodwill the stagecoach continues to enjoy with tens of millions of customers. While I have been deeply committed and focused on managing the Company through this period, I have decided it is best for the Company that I step aside. I know no better individual to lead this company forward than Tim Sloan."

A Slate writer called the news "a stunning fall for a banking leader who had helped guide Wells Fargo through the financial crisis and lead the company through its acquisition of Charlotte-based Wachovia." A New York Times writer called Stumpf's resignation "abrupt." 

Discussion Starters: 

• Do you agree with the reporters' language? Is this a "stunning fall" and an "abrupt departure"?
• Is Stumpf's retirement the right decision for the company at this time? Why or why not? What did the board of directors likely consider in encouraging-or at least accepting-his retirement?

Samsung Trying to Control the Damage

Samsung is dealing with a tough situation: batteries in the Galaxy Note7 have been causing fires. Warnings to turn off Samsung phones are heard on many flights, including mine to Denver this weekend. As the BBC reports, "that sends out a negative message about your products beyond even your own customers."

The company handled the initial reports well but lost favor when its replacements overheated or burned. The BBC article explains the growing issue for Samsung:

"The trouble is that even one phone which catches fire makes for startling pictures and a whole heap of consumer anxiety. Samsung may soon have to decide whether to cut its losses and abandon the Note 7 before it does more damage to its brand."

The New York Times also reported on Samsung's poor crisis communication:

"But for people to see those words, they had to click a link at the top of Samsung's home page with the not-so-urgent label 'Updated Consumer Guidance for the Galaxy Note 7.' As of Tuesday afternoon, the instructions had not been posted to Samsung's Facebook page or the company's Twitter account.

"For some who work in crisis management, it was a baffling and overly passive way for the South Korean electronics giant to deal with a prominent problem that has worsened in the last month."

On its website, Samsung posted this message: 

Samsung Will Ask All Global Partners to Stop Sales and Exchanges of Galaxy Note7 While Further Investigation Takes Place

on October 11, 2016

 

We are working with relevant regulatory bodies to investigate the recently reported cases involving the Galaxy Note7. Because consumers' safety remains our top priority, Samsung will ask all carrier and retail partners globally to stop sales and exchanges of the Galaxy Note7 while the investigation is taking place.

We remain committed to working diligently with appropriate regulatory authorities to take all necessary steps to resolve the situation. Consumers with either an original Galaxy Note7 or replacement Galaxy Note7 device should power down and stop using the device and take advantage of the remedies available.

Discussion Starters:

• Look at Samsung's recent news statements about this situation. How well has the company handled communication on its website?
• How, if at all, do you see this issue potentially reflecting poorly on the mobile industry? What should other phone manufacturers do?

How Naked Is Naked Juice?

Is Naked juice really "healthy" and worth the money? A lawsuit filed by the Center for Science in the Public Interest says Pepsi is misleading consumers with some of its claims.

On the packaging, Pepsi promotes the juice as having "no added sugar" and repeats words like kale, when the truth tells a different story. A 15-ounce bottle of Naked contains eight teaspoons of sugar; compare that to a 16-ounce soda, which has about 12 teaspoons. The company's Kale Blazer certainly emphasizes kale on its label, but the primary ingredients are apple and orange juice, cheap products that don't justify the price consumers pay, according to the lawsuit. 

In addition to these misleading statements, the CSPI is faulting Pepsi for not labeling the drinks, "not a low-calorie food," which is required by the FDA when consumers could think otherwise.

Pepsi has responded to the lawsuit:

"Any sugar present in Naked Juice products comes from the fruits and/or vegetables contained within and the sugar content is clearly reflected on label for all consumers to see. Every bottle of Naked Juice clearly identifies the fruit and vegetables that are within."

This isn't Naked's first challenge. In 2013, Pepsi paid $9 million for calling the product "all natural." 

Discussion Starters:

• Do you agree more with the lawsuit or with Pepsi's response?
• What's the difference between sugar from fruit and added sugar? How much does this distinction matter?
• If the lawsuit is successful, how should Pepsi change the labels on its Naked products?

More Trouble for Wells Fargo

In what The Wall Street Journal called "another round of blistering criticism," Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf faced the House Financial Services Committee on Thursday. If Elizabeth Warren didn't challenge Stumpf enough last week during the Senate Banking Committee Hearing, Chairman Jeb Hensarling stated early on, in his opening statement, "Fraud is fraud. Theft is theft."

He also said, "All culpable individuals must be held accountable." Earlier in the week, Stumpf was criticized for firing low-level employees but retaining managers. For the first time, Stumpf said that "10% or more" of the 5,300 employees fired were branch managers, but that didn't seem to soothe the committee members. Others expressed enthusiasm for the $41 million clawback (money recovered from Stumpf's compensation), said he should be fired, and encouraged the break-up of Wells Fargo.

Jeff Sonnenfeld, A Yale University School of Management professor, called Stumpf "completely unprepared" and called the scene "political theater."

To make matters worse for Wells Fargo, the bank will pay $24 million in settlements for "allegedly improper repossessions of cars belonging to members of the U.S. military."

Discussion Starters:

• How well did Hensarling introduce the hearings? Did you find him too harsh, right on target, or something else?
• Sonnenfeld also says Stumpf wasn't prepared for questions. Do you agree with his assessment?
• What were Stumpf's strongest and weakest points?

Wells Fargo CEO Suffers Tough Questions

During the U.S. Senate Committee Hearing, Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf responded to difficult questions, particularly from Senator Elizabeth Warren, a democrat from Massachusetts. Stumpf's prepared responses, particularly the "only 1%" of employees argument, wasn't well received by Warren and others. Warren interrupted with harsh words, telling Stumpf, "You should resign and give back the money you took" and calling his practice "gutless leadership."

Another tense moment, reported by The Wall Street Journal, was when Senator Robert Menendez challenged Stumpf's salary:

Mr. Stumpf said earlier in the hearing that the fired employees had been making "good money" of $35,000 to $60,000 a year, a point that Sen. Robert Menendez brought up. "How much money did you make last year?" asked Sen. Menendez. "$19.3 million," replied Mr. Stumpf.

"Now that's good money," Sen. Menendez replied, unsmiling.

Menendez, from New Jersey, gave a poignant example of a woman's daughter whose credit score was affected by the scandal.

Discussion Starters:

• How would you describe Warren's approach in questioning? Do you find her inquiries fair, unfair, or something else?
• How well did Stumpf respond to Warren's questions?

New Trouble for Christie on the Bridge Closings

After years of denying knowledge about wrongdoing, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie may have a tough time maintaining his stance. In 2013, members of Christie's administration were accused of intentionally closing lanes on the George Washington Bridge to cause problems for the mayor of Fort Lee, who didn't support Christie's re-election. Christie denied the allegations for himself and his senior staff:

"I've made it very clear to everybody on my senior staff that if anyone had any knowledge about this that they needed to come forward to me and tell me about it, and they've all assured me that they don't."

But now the truth comes out: in court filings, text messages between two staffers, Christina Renna and Peter Sheridan, during Christie's news conference in 2013 have indicated otherwise, according to a Wall Street Journal report:

"Are you listening?" Ms. Renna texted Mr. Sheridan, according to the filing. "He just flat out lied about senior staff and [campaign manager Bill] Stepien not being involved."

"I'm listening," Mr. Sheridan replied. "Gov is doing fine. Holding his own up there."

According to the filing, Ms. Renna replied: "Yes. But he lied. And if emails are found with the subpoena or ccfg [Chris Christie for Governor] emails are uncovered in discovery if it comes to that it could be bad."

Mr. Christie, encountering reporters outside a Manhattan radio studio after a guest-host stint on a sports-talk program, called the text-message matter "ridiculous."

"There's nothing new to talk about," he said, according to a video of the exchange posted by the Associated Press. Asked about Ms. Renna's remark that he had lied, Mr. Christie said "yeah, and she was wrong."

Discussion Starters:

• Do you believe Christie's defense? Why or why not?
• Big picture: What is most relevant in this situation? Let's not lose perspective.
• Christie was making a run for president in the 2016 elections. Could this hurt his candidacy for 2020? Also, Trump didn't choose Christie as his running mate, although Christie expressed interest. To what extent do you think his decision was tied to this situation?

Offensive 9/11 Mattress Company Ad

What were they thinking? Miracle Mattress in San Antonio, TX, produced a commercial advertising twin mattress prices for 9/11. At the end of the ad, two employees fall into "towers" of mattresses, and the lead actor says, "We'll never forget."

Understandably, people were outraged. This reminds me of the golf club that used a similar promotion in 2013. Also, this year, Coca-Cola took down a display of soda cartons at a Florida Walmart.

The company owner posted an apology and announced the store's closing on Facebook. He said elsewhere that he was unaware of the ad created by his employees.

Discussion Starters:

• How are these promotions different from, for example, Memorial Day sales?
• Assess the owner's apology. What principles of persuasion does he use? What recommendations do you have for improving the message?
• In this post, the owner didn't mention that he was unaware of the ad, as he did in other sources. What's your view of this choice?

Wells Fargo Reaches Settlement Agreement

Wells Fargo is taking action after the discovery that bank employees opened millions of fake checking and credit card accounts. Employees opened accounts in unsuspecting customers' names so they could earn credit for the sale. The bank benefited from fees people paid on accounts they never used.

In addition to paying a $100 million settlement fee to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the bank has fired 5,300 employees over the past few years.

The company issued two major communications related to the situation: 

• A press release
• An email to employees

In addition, Jim Cramer interviewed CEO John Stumpf on Mad Money:

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• Compare the two Wells Fargo statements. How well does the company tailor these messages to primary and secondary audiences?
• How can customers miss paying fees? What is their responsibility, and what is the company's? Consider visual displays of bank statements in your response.
• How well does Stumpf respond to Jim Cramer's questions? Which are his strongest and weakest arguments?

Wells Fargo Apologizes for Ads Targeting Teens

Wells Fargo made the news twice this week. In addition to a big settlement for creating fake accounts, the company has apologized for an ad targeting teens.

Several actors and other artists have expressed their disappointment in the company's promoting science over the arts. The Irregular Times was one of many critics of the company's campaign:

Wells Fargo will teach teens that the path to financial prosperity just so happens to come through the financial services offered by Wells Fargo itself. That's no coincidence. Teen Financial Education Day is really just a sales gimmick, at which Wells Fargo will teach the children of working Americans that they can't have the privilege of careers in the arts.

Wells Fargo posted an apology on Twitter.

Discussion Starters:

• A Forbes article reminds us that science isn't something you just do; it's good to have "talent and ability" for the field. How do you see this factoring into the ad's logical failure?
• The Forbes writer also insults the "marketing guru" who developed the ad campaign. What's your view? Should the company have known better, or is this a good attempt to advertise to teens, even if the results were appreciated?

ITT Closes and Leaves Students in Limbo

The U.S. Education Department has stepped up its regulation of for-profit institutions, and ITT hasn't fared well. The government cut federal aid for new students attending ITT schools, and the organization has decided to close the entire operation-130 campuses across 38 states. More than 35,000 students and 8,000 employees will have to find new a place to study or work.

A non-profit sector research analyst was quoted in the LA Times: "Both Corinthian and ITT made the same bad decision, which was to guarantee third-party private loans while pushing out more students into a weak jobs market after the Great Recession."

The New York Times reported a host of questionable practices at ITT for years:

"[Critics] reported deceptive marketing; strong-arm recruitment tactics; misleading information about costs, courses, graduation and job placement rates; inflated enrollment numbers; bait-and-switch schemes; subpar instruction; and more."

A former dean was troubled by ITT's practices but got fired when he raised issues.

U.S. Education Department Secretary John B. King Jr. said, "The school's decisions have put its students and millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded federal student aid at risk." He explained the Department's perspective and provided resources to students in a blog post, shown here. Students also can participate in a webinar to learn more.

ITT, of course, is blaming the government, calling its actions "unwarranted" and "inappropriate and unconstitutional." 

Discussion Starters:

• Compare ITT's statement and King's message to students. What differences do you notice in audience focus, tone, messaging, organization, and so on? 
• What other information do you think students will need? What about employees?
• How could ITT more convincingly defends its position?

Maine Governor Regrets Voice Message

Maine Governor Paul LePage is know for his brash style, but he seems to have crossed a new line. Politico calls him "America's Craziest Governor." Reacting to a reporter, LePage left an enraged voice mail message (NSFW) that included,

"Mr. Gattine, this is Gov. Paul Richard LePage, I would like to talk to you about your comments about my being a racist, you (expletive). I want to talk to you. I want you to prove that I'm a racist. I've spent my life helping black people and you little son-of-a-b----, socialist (expletive). I need you to, just friggin, I want you to record this and make it public because I am after you. Thank you."

He discussed his remarks in a news conference:

Listeners are debating whether LePage has apologized, with a political scientist at the University of Maine, Amy Fried, referring to his speech as "a non-apology apology." Mostly, LePage blames reporters and vowed never to speak to one again:

"I will no longer speak to the press ever again after today," LePage said. "And I'm serious. Everything will be put in writing. I am tired of being caught - the gotcha moments."

"You folks live in a seven-second fiction world. I live in 24-hour reality," he continued.

Some are calling for LePage to resign. At first, he seemed to consider it ("maybe it's time to move on"), but he has since changed his mind.

Discussion Starters:

• Few people will accept LePage's shifting the blame to the reporter, but does he have a point? What, if any, responsibility does the reporter have in this situation? Read more.
• What's your view of LePage's "non-apology apology"? What else should he say? Should he resign?

Sponsorships Getting Less Clear

The Federal Trade Commission has guidelines for celebrities and bloggers to reveal their sponsorship ties, but they are not consistently followed, and some say the guidelines could be clearer. Companies shell out thousands of dollars for people with large numbers of followers to mention their brands on social media. But what's the difference between testimony and an ad?

Mary K. Engle, the FTC's associate director for advertising practices told The New York Times that, although an endorsement has to be clear, they are not "prescriptive" about what's included in a social mention. The FTC guidelines suggest starting a post with something like "#Ad." According to the Times, "For example, simply saying 'thank you' to a brand or adding '#sp' or '#spon' probably isn't clear enough, while saying a brand is a 'partner' probably is," Engle said.

The organization Truth in Advertising wrote a letter to the Kardashian/Jenner family about recent posts they consider to be deceptive marketing. On her Instagram account, Kylie Jenner displays Fit Tea but fails to mention that this is a paid endorsement.

Discussion Starters:

• Should the FTC create more specific guidelines for what to include in social media posts? Or should celebrities know better?
• What's the value of disclosing that a celebrity is compensated by a brand? How, if it all, would a clearer marking affect your decision to buy a product?

Mylan CEO Defends EpiPen Price Hike

Fighting critics who call the price hike "greedy" and "outrageous," Mylan CEO Heather Bresch makes no excuses for running a for-profit company. Yet the cost of an EpiPen has increased from about $165 in 2011 to more than $600 today. 

In a CNBC interview, Bresch stressed that "everybody who needs an EpiPen, has an EpiPen." She focused the costs involved in making the product widely available.

Trying to deflect blame, Bresch said, "This is a healthcare issue. . . . The system incentivizes higher prices." Pharmacy, retailers, and wholesalers are all taking a cut and are raising their prices. 

Discussion Starters:

• Twice, Bresch said, "As a mother..." How effective is this strategy as part of her argument?
• How well does Bresch convey her points? Which arguments do you find most and least convincing?
• CNBC's chart is effective because it shows the dramatic increase over time. What's your view of the caption about skiing? 

Trump Vs. Morning Joe

Now, Donald Trump is feuding with the hosts of MSNBC's Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough. Earlier this month, Scarborough wrote a scathing piece in The Washington Post, "The GOP Must Dump Trump." He ended by encouraging Republicans to withdraw their support and find a new candidate:

"A bloody line has been crossed that cannot be ignored. At long last, Donald Trump has left the Republican Party few options but to act decisively and get this political train wreck off the tracks before something terrible happens."

Escalation of the debate has continued, as Brzezinski said he sounded as if "he's had a lot to drink" during a campaign rally speech in Fredericksburg, VA.

Trump did not enjoy that comment and struck back with a series of tweets matched by Scarborough, who shot back, "Neurotic and not very bright? Look in the mirror."

  The tweets came a few hours after Trump's campaign manager said he doesn't insult people. This is from Huffington Post:

"I don't like when people hurl personal insults," Kellyanne Conway told ABC News' "This Week." "That will never be my style, I'm a mother of four small children, it would be a terrible example for me to feel otherwise ... [Trump] doesn't hurl personal insults."

And yet Conway told Fox Business, "He has a right to defend himself."

Discussion Starters:

• When you watch the clip from Morning Joe, what do you notice about Brzezinski's delivery of the comment? How do others on the show react? Do you think she may regret her comment?
• How should Trump have reacted? And how should Scarborough have responded? As always, all players in the situation had several choices throughout these exchanges.

McDonald's Pulls Kids' Fitness Trackers

After a sizable backlash, McDonald's is pulling fitness trackers for kids. People complained that worrying kids about their weight could cause more problems than good. Brian Cuban, who writes and speaks about his history of an eating disorder and addition, posted the tweet shown here.  This story reminds me of the teen magazine that showed girls what type of bathing suit they should wear for their body type.

Chicago Tribune noted the "apparent hypocrisy of McDonald's encouraging children to exercise while also serving them high-fat foods":

Indeed, the paradox of a fitness monitor wedged in a Happy Meal box alongside chicken nuggets and french fries is hard to ignore. Even the healthiest Happy Meal combination will have kids ingesting 410 calories and 19 grams of fat, according to the company's online nutrition calculator. That's a lot of steps.

In announcing the decision to pull the bands, a McDonald's spokesperson said the company had received "limited reports of potential skin irritations that may be associated with wearing the band." No mention of the controversy was mentioned.

Discussion Starters:

• Should McDonald's have been more forthcoming about the controversy? What could have been the positive and negative consequences of admitting the issue about kids' weight? 
• Articles about the story say that people can distinguish between what companies do for the social good and what companies do for themselves. How does that play into the reaction in this case? Are those goals mutually exclusive?

Twitter's New Quality Filter

Twitter is still trying to make the site a kinder place, with fewer trolls and less abuse. Twitter's user base has been declining, and several celebrities have signed off permanently. The company, led by Jack Dorsey, has responded to complaints: "We are going to continue our work on making Twitter a safer place."

The latest attempt is a "quality filter," which Twitter explains on its blog:

"Turning it on filters lower-quality content, like duplicate Tweets or content that appears to be automated, from your notifications and other parts of your Twitter experience. It does not filter content from people you follow or accounts you've recently interacted with – and depending on your preferences, you can turn it on or off in your notifications settings."

Twitter frames the new features as ways to "Control Your Experience on Twitter." In addition to the filter, users can limit their notifications, for example, from only people they follow.

Discussion Starters:

• How well is Twitter addressing criticism of bullying and harassment on the site? To what extent will these features address concerns?
• How well did Twitter present the change on its blog?

Embarrassment for the Olympic Athletes and an Apology

U.S. Olympic swimmer Ryan Lochte concocted a story about being robbed in Rio de Janiero and later apologized. Lochte said he and three other swimmers were robbed by people claiming to be police officers. Turns out, other U.S. swimmers said Lochte was drunk and unruly, and we learned later what actually happened: he vandalized a gas station bathroom, and armed guards approached him.

Lochte posted an apology on Instagram. But the damage extended far beyond the gas station. Rio officials are angry about the hit this incident may have on the city's reputation, and the Olympic's committee is trying to distance itself from Lochte's behavior.

Lochte's statement hasn't satisfied many people. Quoted in The New York Times, sports commentator Rodrigo Mattos said, "Lochte apologizes but doesn't admit lying. He's still portraying himself as a victim. So much arrogance."

Discussion Starters:

• Why did Lochte lie? How believable was the story, and what role did the other swimmers play?
• Another approach, of course, is to come forward with the truth even before the story got out. What could have been the consequences of this approach?
• Should Lochte have said something different in his apology? What is at stake?
• Do you agree with Mattos's views that Lochte is arrogant? How would you define arrogance, and how does Lochte show this trait?

Should Miss Teen USA Give Up the Crown?

Karlie Hay, from Texas, was crowned Miss Teen USA on Saturday, but evidence of her using a racial slur in 2013 and 2014 has surfaced. Hay apologized for her tweets in a statement and in an interview with George Stephanopoulos: 

"I am very sorry. It's embarrassing. It's something I'm ashamed of. I've grown up from that 15-year-old girl who used that type of language. It's never acceptable and now I know how hurtful it is. It hurts me to know that at one point in my life I used that language. I said that. It's not me."

The Miss Universe organization decided not to have Hay give up the crown:

"As Karlie stated, she was in a different place in her life and made a serious mistake she regrets and for which she sincerely apologizes." 

I don't watch beauty pageants, but I can't imagine how the judges chose a winner from the top 5 contestants. The New York Times called them "striking similar in physical appearance." 

 

Image source.

Discussion Starters: 

• Should Hay give up the crown? If she chooses not to, should the Miss Universe organization force her to?
• Hay's tweets emerged just hours after the show ended. Should social media screening be part of the pageant process? Why or why not? 
• Another option was for Hay to present this information as part of her application or maybe to discuss her personal growth in her speech or interview. (Do they still do that?) What do you think of this get-out-ahead-of-it strategy? 

Melania Trump's Plagiarized Speech

By any definition, Melania Trump's GOP Convention speech was plagiarized from Michelle Obama. The similarities between Donald Trump's wife's speech and Michelle Obama's 2008 DNC speech are uncanny. Here's one comparison from CNN, and other similarities exist:

Donald Trump's campaign chairman Paul Manafort denied accusations of plagiarism: "To think that she would do something like that knowing how scrutinized her speech was going to be last night is just really absurd." Senior Communications Advisor Jason Miller said only, "In writing her beautiful speech, Melania's team of writers took notes on her life's inspirations, and in some instances included fragments that reflected her own thinking. Melania's immigrant experience and love for America shone through in her speech, which made it such a success."

Later, the RNC communications director, Sean Spicer, said that searches for some of Ms. Trump's phrases turn up similarities from "My Little Pony" and John Legend, who tweeted, "I would very much like to be excluded from this narrative." But the phrases are not nearly as verbatim as those in Michelle Obama's speech. Spicer told The Huffington Post, "Melania Trump said, 'You work hard for what you want in life.' Akon said, 'Work hard for what you get in life.' John Legend said, ‘Work hard.'" 

Update: Meredith McIver, a Trump staff writer, took responsibility for the mistake. A New York Times article said the letter "breathed new life into a story now in its third day." 

Discussion Starters:

• How could such a mistake happen? Melania Trump said, "I read once over it, that's all, because I wrote it ... with (as) little help as possible."
• The Trump campaign said that no one will be fired over this incident. Should someone take the fall? 
• Does McIver's admission end the conversation? What else, if anything, should the campaign managers or Trumps say? Is The New York Times writer right: did the admission just keep the story alive? 

Taking Offense

Two groups are backtracking this week for offensive symbols and language. Are people too sensitive, or should marketers be more careful? 

The Trump campaign for president created the first failing: a logo that looked pornographic to some people. A Slate article is titled, "A Hard Look at the Trump-Pence Campaign's Penetrating New Logo." Twitter jokes abound: 

• @ellievhall: "When two people love each other very much and want to start a campaign together..."
• @willrahn: "How are we supposed to explain the new Trump logo to our children??"

Although the Trump campaign hasn't responded specifically, the logo no longer appears on the website.

In other news, Forever 21 has pulled t-shirts for boys with sayings such as, "Sorry, I only date models," "Chicks are all over me," and "Ladies Man." Critics say the t-shirts sexualize children. 

Forever 21 communicated the decision in a statement: "Forever 21 takes feedback and product concerns very seriously. With regards to the T-shirts in question, after receiving feedback we have taken immediate action to have them removed from our website.  We sincerely apologize to anyone who was offended by the products."

Discussion Starters: 

• What's your opinion to the initial question: Are people too sensitive, or should marketers be more careful? 
• Did the Trump campaign and Forever 21 do the right thing in pulling the logo and t-shirts? 
• Should the Trump campaign communicate anything else at this point? Did the Forever 21 statement say enough?