Outsiders By Howard S. Becker - 1619 Words

Outsiders Howard S. Becker 1. â€Å"When a rule is enforced, the person who is supposed to have broken it may be seen as a special kind of person, one who cannot be trusted to live by the rules agreed on by the group. He is regarded as an outsider. But the person who is thus labeled an outsider may have a different view of the matter. He may not accept the rule by which he is being judged and may not regard those who judge him as either component or legitimately entitled to do so. Hence, a second meaning of the term emerges: the rule breaker may feel his judges are outsiders.† This quote from the book Outsiders by Howard S. Becker gives the idea that there are social laws, or â€Å"rules†, and when broken you are considered an outsider. This is shown when Becker, as seen above, says, â€Å"When a rule is enforced†. What he says also sets up the different points of view. When Becker says, â€Å"person who is supposed to have†, he means the person who breaks the â€Å"rule† may not consider it a rule at all or just not think it applies to him, â€Å"a special kind of person†. Showing how the deviant person sets himself/herself apart from the general public, this person will not be offended by the people who judge him because he sees the said judger as an outsider himself. Because the â€Å"outsiders† or said rule breakers can see the people not breaking the social norms as outsiders too, it sets up a subculture or a deviant society, where there is mutuality in non-conformity. On page one-hundred andShow MoreRelatedHoward S Becker1318 Words   |  6 PagesHoward Becker SOC 101: Introduction to Sociology Professor Smith March 4, 2012 Howard S. Becker Howard Becker was a famous American sociologist. He made several contributions in the fields of occupations, education, deviance and art and made several studies in those fields. He particularly made several studies in the field of social deviance and occupations. Most of studies went into the interactions between criminal people and regular people. Many of these studies included the criminalRead MoreEssay about Labelling People894 Words   |  4 Pagesof deviance can not assume that they are dealing with a homogenous category. When they study people who have been labelled deviant (Howard Becker) If the agents of social control define youngsters as delinquents for breaking the law, those youngsters become deviant. They have been labelled as such by those who have the power to make labels stick. However Becker argued ‘deviance is not a quality that lies in behaviour itself but in the interaction between the person who commits an act and thoseRead MoreTaking a Look at the Labeling Theory909 Words   |  4 Pagesresult of the public’s perception of a behavior, rather than an actual trait of the behavior. Howard S. Becker, an originator of labeling theory, offers one of most often quoted statements related to the theory. Becker’s (1963) Outsiders states: Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. From this point of view, deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits, but ratherRead MoreDeviance Essay1597 Words   |  7 Pages In the article, â€Å"Outsiders, Defining Deviance,† written by Howard Becker, Becker details the concept of deviance and provides insight about the outsiders that try to leave the mainstream. From the Webster’s Dictionary, mainstream is defined as, â€Å"the ideas, attitudes, or activities that are regarded as normal or conventional; the dominant trend in opinion, fashion, or the arts†. The mainstream is the common behaviors that the majority of society abides by. Becker defines deviance as the judgmentRead MoreLabelling Theory2875 Words   |  12 PagesBecker was influenced by the following: Charles Cooley s Human Nature and the Social Order (190 2) examines the personal perception of oneself through studies of children and their imaginary friends. Cooley develops the theoretical concept of the looking glass self, a type of imaginary sociability (Cooley 1902). People imagine the view of themselves through the eyes of others in their social circles and form judgements of themselves based on these imaginary observations (Cooley 1902). The main ideaRead MoreThe Theories Of Social Control946 Words   |  4 Pagesthe US culture, but not all citizens have the same means of achieving this shared value. It is a very liberal based model, none the less, we can still find things that allow for free thinking and come to mutual grounds of how ambiguous our society s values really are. Another study found that men/boys were the rational doers and achievers whereas boys favored boyfriends, dating, dancing, and other forms of vanity. In the book Delinquent Boys, Albert Cohen also noted that women exist solely toRead MoreMoral Entrepreneur - Howard S. Becker Coined The Phrase860 Words   |  4 PagesMoral entrepreneur - Howard S. Becker coined the phrase Moral Entrepreneurs (White, Haines and Asquith, 2012) Moral entrepreneurs advocate a certain idea that attempts to influence a group to embrace certain ideas (Becker, 1963). They take leadership in labelling behaviours and advocating or promoting this label throughout society (Uroda, 2016). Moral entrepreneurs are divided into two categories, rule creators and rule enforcers (Smith, 2016). Rule creators are those that create rules or moral crusadersRead MoreHoward Becker s The On Opium Addiction3802 Words   |  16 PagesHoward Becker is an American social scientist who has made real commitments to the human science of aberrance, humanism of workmanship, and human science of music. Becker additionally composed broadly on sociological written work styles and systems. Moreover, Becker s 1963 book Outsiders gave the establishments to labeling theory. Becker is regularly called a typical interactionist or social interactionist; nevertheless, he does not adjust himself to either system. A graduate of the University ofRead MoreHoward Becker And The Modern Labelling Theory864 Words   |  4 PagesHoward Becker (1963) is said to be the creator of the modern labelling theory. He is also responsible for the term ‘moral entrepreneur which is a term used to describe law making officials, who get certain ‘behavior’ or ‘criminal behavior‘ illegalized. Becker proposed that criminal behavior is dynamic in nature and changes throughout time. He suggests that the actual act has nothing to do with the theory. What matters was the type of people going through the criminal justice system. Becker paysRead MoreSociology and Deviance Essay2077 Words   |  9 Pagesdeviance through biological, psychological and sociological methodologies and while the examination of the theories is necessarily brief, it will interrogate some of the main theories related to deviant behaviour in society. The essay will employ Howard Becker’s labeling theory as the major method of understanding deviance, whilst the issue of drug abuse will be used as the specific deviant behaviour. I will also demonstrate that the notion of deviance in society is subject to change according to

Pinnacle Foods Ipo Free Essays

Pinnacle Foods Inc. : Initial Public Offering MACKK Consulting Group BSAD 444. 20 April 1st, 2013 Company History Pinnacle Foods Group is a food packaging company specializing in shelf stable and frozen food categories. We will write a custom essay sample on Pinnacle Foods Ipo or any similar topic only for you Order Now The company was formed in 1998 as Vlasic Foods International, acquiring several food-manufacturing brands such as Swanson TV dinners and Open Pit from the Campbell Soup Company. Pinnacle’s portfolio of iconic brands dates back in existence to the 1800s. The earliest brand owned by Pinnacle Foods, Armour Star, has existed since 1867 when Philip Armour founded it as Armour and Company. Armour was the first company to produce canned meat and was once Chicago’s most important business, helping to make the city and its stockyards the center of the American meatpacking industry. Throughout the late 1800s and 1900s, iconic brands such as Duncan Hines, Log Cabin, Aunt Jemima and Hungry Man were introduced and now are a part of the Pinnacle Foods name. Pinnacle Foods acquired Aurora Foods in 2003 when the company’s health was in jeopardy due to lawsuits in 2001. Ian Wilson, a former executive with Coco-Cola, founded Aurora Foods in 1995 using the company to purchase Van de Kamp Seafood from Pillsbury along with several other brands. As a result of major lawsuits in 2001, Wilson and other Aurora executives plead guilty to securities fraud for misrepresentation of the company’s financial statements. Jim Smith replaced Wilson as CEO of Aurora Foods until 2002, at which time motions were set in place that lead to Pinnacle’s acquisition of Aurora. Pinnacle closed Aurora’s Missouri offices and moved them to Cherry Hill, New Jersey where the currently remain. In 2007 The Blackstone Group, a New York City private equity firm, bought Pinnacle Foods for $2. 16 billion (G. S. , 2007). Since then, Pinnacle Foods has acquired Birds Eye Foods, Inc. , adding a mix of frozen and specialty brands to its already iconic portfolio. Industry Overview * Ashley Company Overview Today Fortune Magazine ranks Pinnacle in the Top 1,000 Companies with over 4,000 employees. Pinnacle’s products can be found in more than 85% of American households and are leaders in their respective categories, holding the first or second market share position in 10 of the 12 of the categories in which they compete. Pinnacle currently focuses on growing their â€Å"leadership brands† while reinvigorating their â€Å"foundation brands†. Their leadership brands are those with the most potential for growth and innovation. These include brands such as Vlasic, Duncan Hines, and Ms. Butter-Worth’s. Pinnacle prides themselves on debuting category breakthroughs with these brands. These leading brands are used prominently in marketing campaigns that celebrate their robust vitality. Pinnacle’s foundation brands are those that have a strong and recognizable reputation in most households. Families already know and love these brands such as Aunt Jemima Frozen Breakfast, Open Pit, and Hungry-Man. Pinnacle strives to raise the bar with these familiar foods through new flavours and health benefits. Pinnacle must be innovative with these familiar brands to ensure they remain as popular as they currently are. Financial Overview Financially, Pinnacle has experienced minimal growth over the last year. Net sales increased marginally from $2. 47 billion in 2011 to $2. 48 billion in 2012 and in North America specifically, net sales grew a meager 1% from $2. 07 to $2. 08 billion. EBIT was $284 million in 2012, after giving effect to $66 million in pre-tax charges related to restructuring and refinancing. This restructuring also impacted net earnings, as Pinnacle had to pay $51 million in after-tax charges and was left with $53 million in net earnings. Despite these charges, this net income shows a strong recovery from 2011 when the company suffered a net loss of $47 million. Total capital expenditures were $78 million in 2012, down from $117 million in 2011. These expenditures include footprint consolidation. A summary of these figures can be seen below in Exhibit 1. Exhibit 1: Pinnacle Financial Statements It can be seen in Exhibit 1 that Pinnacle has a substantial amount of acquisition, merger and other restructuring charges. These charges are primarily related to Pinnacle closing facilities in Washington, New York, Wisconsin, and Delaware. A complete breakdown of these expenditures has been included in exhibit 2. Exhibit 2: Acquisition, merger, and other restructuring charges One of the problems that Pinnacle currently faces is their large amount of debt. They have roughly $550 million of a term loan that is due in 2014. This resulted in Pinnacle entering the market with a $300 million incremental term loan last year, dubbed F, with proceeds to be used to help repay the $550 million. Pinnacle has an additional $400 million E term loan that was syndicated earlier in 2012. This loan matures in October 2018 and is covered by a 101 soft call premium until April 17, 2013. Proceeds from that deal were used to issue $199 million in 10. 625% subordinated notes due in 2017. Altogether Pinnacle has about $641 million outstanding under the extended term loan due in 2016 (Bisbey, 2012). This is one of the primary reasons for Pinnacle’s IPO, as will be discussed later in the report. The balance sheet below summarizes Pinnacle’s debt obligations as well as their assets and equity. Exhibit 3: Pinnacle’s Balance Sheet for 2011 and 2012 After performing a two-finger analysis of this balance sheet it can be concluded that Pinnacle has not made any drastic changes over the past two years. Assets have decreased slightly but that was coupled with a decrease in liabilities by roughly the same amount which is reasonable. Exhibit 4 is a portion of Pinnacle’s cash flow statement that helps explain these changes in the balance sheet. Pinnacle’s cash flows from financing increased 212% between 2011 and 2012, the vast majority of this expenditure being the repayment of debt. By making a number of loan repayments, Pinnacle decreased their cash and therefore their assets, while also reducing their liabilities. Exhibit 4: Cash Flows from Financing Activities Ratio| 2012| 2011| Return on Equity| 5. 9%| -5. 54%| Return on Assets| 1. 19%| -1. 05%| Return on Sales| 11. 46%| 7. 4%| Current Ratio| 2. 11| 2. 17| Quick Ratio| 1. 04| 1. 17| Debt-to-Equity Ratio| 3. 95| 4. 26| | | | Exhibit 5: 2012 Ratio Analysis of Pinnacle Group Inc. These ratios †¦ IPO The food-industry sector is changing due to increased globalization, vertical integration, and mergers and acquisitions. This is forcing many firms to look to alternatives to debt financing in order to keep up with the competition. The public equity market is a valuable option in financing the growth necessary to survive amongst competitors, as it offers access to more equity capital than could be attained from other sources (Stegelin Houston, 2007). With millions of dollars in debt obligations coming up due in the next few years, it is understandable that Pinnacle is having an Initial Public Offering to raise capital. This follows suit with research that has shown that as a food-industry firm’s leverage ratio increases, the likelihood of an IPO increases as well (Stegelin Houston, 2007). It has also been noted that the probability of a food-industry firm IPO decreases with the firm’s size and age (Stegelin Houston, 2007). Pinnacle is currently 15 years old which is incredibly â€Å"young† compared to industry leaders Kraft and Kellogg which are both over 100 years old. This could be a contributing factor to why they are wanting to go public. This IPO will follow 13 other offerings in 2013 backed by financial sponsors such as private-equity firms. These 13 other offerings can be used to loosely predict the success of Pinnacle’s IPO, as Pinnacle is backed by private-equity firm Blackstone. These IPOs were successful, seeing an average first-day gain of 22% and are up an average of 21% from their listing dates. These results are promising in comparison to 30 other IPOs at large, showing an average 15% first-day gain and a gain of 19% from the listing dates (Driscoll, M. 2013). Another important benchmark is the IPOs of other food sellers. There were mixed results regarding the success of food seller IPOs in 2012. The health food sector showed strength with natural food companies Annie’s Inc. , Natural Grocers by Vitamin Cottage Inc. , and WhiteWave Foods Co. performing well since their IPOs. Annie’s shares have more than doubled s ince being listed last March while the value of Natural Grocers has risen over 40% since their listing in July (Driscoll, M. , 2013). On the other hand, Roundy’s Inc. and Amira Nature Foods Ltd. have underperformed since their IPOs. Roundy’s is a Midwestern supermarket chain and Amira is a rice seller, both of which are down about 20% from their offerings in October and February respectively (Driscoll, M. , 2013). Since Pinnacle offers processed, packaged foods, benchmarking their success from the natural, organic food IPOs is not very reliable. With people becoming more and more health conscious these days, it is not surprising that these health food companies found success in their IPOs. Although Pinnacle does carry the frozen vegetable brand Birdseye, they also carry a number of brands that would not be classified as healthy. Of the aforementioned companies, the most reliable comparison for Pinnacle would likely be with Roundy’s, the supermarket chain. Supermarkets sell a wide variety of processed and pre-packaged foods, and are the medium through which Pinnacle’s brands are sold. However, there is still not a strong correlation between the two firms. On March 27th, 2013, Pinnacle announced their Initial Public Offering of 29,000,000 shares of common stock at $20 per share. Pinnacle also granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase an additional 4,350,000 shares at the IPO price. It is estimated that Pinnacle will raise net proceeds of about $545. 2 million after subtracting underwriting costs. Pinnacle plans to use the entirety of these earnings to pay off some of their debt. They plan to redeem $465 million in aggregate principal amount of 9. 25% Senior Notes due in 2015 at a redemption price of 100%. The remainder of their IPO proceeds, along with some cash on hand, will be used to repay $119 million of the senior secured term loan B facility maturing in April 2014. IPO Success Pinnacle Foods had a very successful IPO on March 28, 2013. The company issued a total of 33,350,000 shares of common stock, including the entirety of the additional 4,350,000 shares that the underwriters had the option to purchase. Pinnacle now has a total of 117. 2 million common shares outstanding. Net of all underwriting discounts, Pinnacle raised $627 million through this offering, which is $81. 8 million more than they had initially anticipated. Pinnacle will couple this money with $40 million of cash on hand to pay down $667 million in outstanding debt. Instead of their initial plans of repaying $119 million of their term loan B due next April, they will repay $202 million. Exhibit 6: Pinnacle Foods’ Stock Performance Since IPO as Compared to SP 500 As can be seen in Exhibit 6, Pinnacle shares (blue line) seem to be experiencing steady growth since their IPO on March 28, 2013. This is especially positive since the SP 500 (brown line) seems to be doing quite the opposite. Pinnacle shares have increased from their low of $22. 15 to a high of $24. 61, an 11% increase. References Driscoll, M. (2013, Mar 25). Pinnacle is hoping investors feel hungry. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://search. proquest. com/docview/1319182111? accountid=13803 G. , S. S. (2007). Black stone Chows Down On Pinnacle Foods Group. (cover story). High Yield Report, 18(7), 1-15. Stegelin, F. , Houston, J. (2007). Factors Influencing the Initial Public Offering (IPO) Decision of Food Distribution Firms. Journal Of Food Distribution Research, 38(1), 215-216. Stratton, K. (2012). Pinnacle Foods Group Gets 55,000SF Update in Parsippany. National Real Estate Investor Exclusive Insight, 8. Bisbey, A. (2012). Pinnacle Foods Shopping $300M Incremental TL. High Yield Report, 23(34), 28. PRNewswire (2013, Apr 3). Pinnacle Foods Inc. Announces Successful Closing of its Initial Public Offering. ttp://investors. pinnaclefoods. com/phoenix. zhtml? c=223400p=irol-newsArticleID=1803206highlight= PRNewswire (2013, Mar 6). Pinnacle Foods Finance LLC Reports Fourth Quarter Fiscal 2012 Results. http://investors. pinnaclefoods. com/phoenix. zhtml? c=223400p=irol-newsArticleID=1795035highlight= Business Wire (2013, Mar 27). Pinnacle Foods Inc. Announces Pricing of its Initial Public Of fering. http://investors. pinnaclefoods. com/phoenix. zhtml? c=223400p=irol-newsArticleID=1801326highlight= http://www. rttnews. com/2088372/pinnacle-foods-raises-net-proceeds-of-627-mln-i How to cite Pinnacle Foods Ipo, Essays

UNIX Operating System Process States

Question: Describe about the UNIX Operating System Process States? Answer: On UNIX PC working framework, a "zombie" methodology or dead process is a strategy that has finished execution yet at the same time has a right to gain entrance in the method table: it is a system in the "Ended state". This happens for child methods, where the right to gain entrance is still expected to permit the root method to study its child's stopped status: once the quit position is study by means of the deferral framework contact, the "zombie's" access is dispensed with from the process work area and it is said to be harvested. A child strategy constantly first turns into a "zombie" before being wiped out from the source work area. By and large, under standard framework operation "zombies" are quickly tolerantly tended to by their root and after that picked up by the framework methodology that stay "zombies" for a considerable length of time are for the most part a misstep and reason a source stream (Herber., 1997). The expression living dead method starts from the regular meaning of living dead an everlasting individual. In the term's illustration, the child methodology has "passed on" however has not yet been "procured". Likewise, thought about with customary systems, the obliterate control has no impact on a "zombie" system. "Zombie" methodology ought not to be confused with vagrant methods: a vagrant system is a process that is as yet performing, yet whose root has passed away. These don't get to be existing dead processes; rather, they are actualized by "init", which stays on its children. The result is that a system that is both a "zombie" and a vagrant will be picked up immediately. At the point when a methodology closes through quit, the greater part of the stockpiling and assets connected with it are reallocated so they can be utilized by different processes. Then again, the process' right to gain entrance in the methodology work area keeps on being. The root can mull over the kid's stopped position by performing the postponement framework contact, whereupon the living dead is disposed of. The postponement contact may be executed in progressive code, yet it is regularly actualized in a holder for the SIGCHLD evidence, which the root gets at whatever point a child has passed away (Tweed, 2012). After the living dead is killed, its "process identifier (PID)" and get to in the process work area can then be reused. Notwithstanding, if a root is not ready to contact postpone, the living dead will be staying in the process work area, bringing about a source stream. In a few circumstances this may be suitable the root system yearnings to continue holding this source for instance if the root makes an alternate child method it promises that it won't be allotted the same PID. On current UNIX-like systems that hold fast to SUSv3 necessities in this admiration, the accompanying unique case applies: if the root plainly dismisses SIGCHLD by setting its holder to SIG_IGN instead of just disregarding the evidence by standard or has the SA_NOCLDWAIT flag set, all child quit position data will be evacuated and no living dead methodology will be remaining. "Zombie's" can be perceived in the result from the UNIX PS control by the way of life of a "Z" in the "Detail" line. "Zombie's" that exist for more than a couple of months casing for the most part show a bug in the root framework, or simply a bizarre choice to not acquire kids. In the event that the root framework is no more meeting expectations, living dead methodology by and large show a bug in the OS. Similarly as with other source releasing, the way of life of a couple of "zombie's" is not troublesome in itself, however may demonstrate an issue that would become genuine under bulkier bounty. Since there is no stockpiling relegated to living dead methods the main framework stockpiling usage is for the method work area access itself the principle objective with numerous "zombie's" is not working out of capacity, but instead working out of strategy work area records, solidly methodology ID numbers. To dispense with "zombies" from a framework, the SIGCHLD evidence can be sent to the root expressly, utilizing the crush control. On the off chance that the root process still won't get the living dead, the following step would be to take out the root method. At the point when a process drops its root, "init" turns into its new root. "init" consistently does the deferral framework contact to acquire any "zombie's" with "init" as root. At the point when a method passes away, it turns into a "zombie" methodology whose just staying design is to hold its death toll certificate. At the point when the death toll certificate has been accumulated, the process is finally killed from way of life and from the framework's strategy work area. "Zombie" strategies are discernible as "old" in PS results. In the event that the foundation of a child has not abandoned the child and the root passes away before get-together the kid's death toll affirmation, the child is sent to the condition halfway house. Given that the root is existing and the child was not repudiated, when a child tries to bite the dust, the living dead child keeps on being around until the root finally assembles its death toll confirmation. It is given the employment of anticipating the fatalities of stranded children too. This permits living dead children to be put to rest. As an aside, when the framework is kicked, the stacking machine copies the bit into capacity, makes an accumulation and telephone calls the bit's fundamental methodology which, thus, makes itself into method 0. In like "/etc/init" starting the framework and the framework daemons, process 0 may keep hand and perform territories the piece as offbeat systems. Courses of action understandingly holding up at high principle concerns can't be killed in light of the fact that the sign is initially distributed to the process piece control data of the procedure; yet the staying taking care of and conceivable bounce to system abrogation just happens at lower fundamental concerns, that is, beneath PZERO. Truth be told, the last treatment of an evidence inside a system happens generally as the method is being prepared for return to client condition. On the off chance that the framework is a numerous CPU framework, the flagging process and the flagged systems are dealing with diverse CPUs and the flagged method in meeting expectations in client condition, then the flagging CPU meddles with the flagged CPU so that the sign can be arranged for the flagged strategy. References: Herber., R. J. (1997). Defunct, zombie and immortal processes. Batavia: Fermilab. Robert M. Dondero, J. (2008). UNIX Orphan and Zombie Processes. New Jersey: Princeton University. Tweed, B. D. (2012). Killing Zombies, Breaking Pipes, and Other UNIX Shenanigans. New York City, NY, United States of America: CA Technologies.