Spirit Airlines Appeals to Shareholders

Spirit Airlines is trying to persuade shareholders to approve a merger with Frontier Airlines (and reject a hostile takeover bid from JetBlue). Communications on the website, evenmoreultralowfares.com, don’t mention JetBlue’s bid at all:

These messages illustrate adapting information to different genres. As we read each, we see clear, repeated main points—more cost savings for customers and value for shareholders. The company also promises promises more career opportunities and greater job stability for team members. In short, “Everyone wins.” The slide deck is a particularly good example for business communication students to analyze.

In a press release, Spirit confirms the plan with Frontier and encourages shareholders to reject JetBlue’s bid. But the messages on the website, above, remain unchanged. I was expecting to see a clearer comparison, but Spirit’s approach seems to be offensive rather than defensive.

JetBlue's Persuasive Appeal to Spirit Shareholders

Having lost bids to purchase Spirit Airlines, JetBlue is trying a hostile takeover, which includes appealing directly to Spirit shareholders. The letter and website, JetBlueOffersMore.com, are examples of persuasive messages.

On the website, the company uses a simple visual to compare, side-by-side, JetBlue’s offer and Spirit’s plan, which is to merge with Frontier Airlines. A fact sheet promotes the “JetBlue Effect,” which the company describes as lowering fares. In another document, JetBlue counters Spirit’s claim that the takeover would face regulatory challenges.

JetBlue uses strong language and message titles to present its main arguments, for example, “JetBlue’s All-Cash Superior Proposal Offers Greater Value and Closing Certainty.” Business communication students will find more examples of how the company uses persuasive communication principles in these messages.

Twitter's New Privacy Notice

Like most people, I ignore privacy notices, those jumbles of legalese in small print with too few headings. But Twitter’s latest is well designed and written in an authentic voice with conversational language. I can’t say whether previous notices were similar, but this one covers what users might care about and walks the reader through each part.

The notice starts with an engaging introduction that speaks to the reader: “Before you scroll, read this.” Six main points are up front, and each section leads with a user’s question, for example, “Seriously — what happens with my data?”

I wish more companies would write privacy notices this way. But then, people might actually read them.

Starbucks CEO Letter to Partners

After his first month back as CEO, Howard Schultz posted a letter to employees, promising changes. As Starbucks faces labor shortages and more unionized stores, Schultz is doing his best to quell further unrest—and to return to the HR practices, such as benefits for part-time employees back in 1988, that gave the company the reputation as a good employer.

I wonder how this letter “lands” with employees. Is it specific enough? Does it address their bottom-line needs, like enough pay to buy gas and keep up with rent? For example, what does a $1 billion investment mean for the average worker? Also, although not explicit here, reports say that pay increases will apply only to nonunion stores, which has raised legal questions.

These questions also raise issues of leadership character. Is Schultz demonstrating integrity, particularly transparency, in his letter? Otherwise, this is a typical positive-news letter. He demonstrates compassion and empathy and conveys hope. A feel-good video shows Schultz with partners and their ideas for the future.


Dear Partners:

Over the past month, I’ve traveled the country and met with thousands of you from our retail stores and all five roasting plants as we embark on co-creating the future of Starbucks.

The conversations we had were both humbling and inspiring. I heard about the challenges and frustrations you have faced. I heard how hard it has been during the pandemic, and the strain caused by accelerating demand and customer behaviors that have changed. I heard how your experience doesn’t always feel like the Starbucks you used to know or thought it would be.

You also voiced a great deal of hope: hope that meaningful change is possible; hope that Starbucks will restore our leadership in offering new and innovative investments that truly make a difference in your lives; and hope that we will reintroduce joy and connection back into the partner experience and make you proud.

The most important thing we must do in this moment is affirm unequivocally that to be a partner means:

  • You have the pay, benefits, and stability you need, so you can focus on your aspirations

  • You have everything you need to have the best shift, every shift

  • You are recognized and celebrated for who you are

  • You are part of co-creating the future of Starbucks. You have a voice, you feel heard, you can make a difference

As a direct result of your feedback, we are now making additional investments to lift up Starbucks partners and the store experience, contributing to the $1 billion in investments we are committing to the partner and store experience this year alone. Some of the new and more immediate changes you can expect are:

  • Doubling training hours in our stores

  • Pay increases that will apply to all U.S. store partners while recognizing and rewarding tenure

  • Reintroduction of the Black Aprons, Coffee Master program and Leadership in Origin trips to our coffee farm at Hacienda Alsacia

  • New collaboration tools and programs, including a new partner app for easier access to communication, information and resources

That’s just the start. We are also prioritizing and accelerating investments in equipment and technology, enhancements to digital tipping, a financial stability toolkit benefit, and recognition and career development, all with your input. Our history shows that working together is always the best way to transform and elevate the experience we deliver to you, to our customers and to the communities we serve.

As I shared with you last month, love and responsibility are what brought me back to Starbucks: my love of the company and my deep responsibility to our partners and shareholders. Hearing from so many of you since my return has only deepened my commitment and affirmed the need to take bold action to restore your trust and belief in Starbucks. I could not be more optimistic or confident in our next chapter that is now underway.


Onward with gratitude,

Howard


PPT About Lost Luggage

An @AerLingus passenger had been tracking his luggage with Apple’s Airtags but had no luck getting it back from the airline to his home in Dublin. He decided to tweet a PowerPoint presentation to show exactly what happened and where one of his three bags was left—at an address in London. He described the experience, including poor communication from the airline.

The news went viral and was picked up by CNN, but still, the airline didn’t respond. So far, he reports, “I still haven’t had a response or apology from the airline. Am I surprised? No. Am I disappointed? Yes.”

This story reminds me of a PPT way back in 2007, “Yours is a very bad hotel,” when PPT was in its infancy.

@aviosAdventurer did a nice job with the map graphics and location icons. I wish he had included some of the messages to and from the airline. Selfishly, I would like to analyze them against business communication principles, but I also believe they might have strengthened his case against the airline.

Editable Tweets

News about Elon Musk’s proposed Twitter takeover has died down, but a new feature to edit tweets, which Musk encourages, is in progress. The feature would allow users to change tweets without deleting them and reposting.

Proponents point to other platforms—Reddit, Facebook, Instagram—that allow text changes. The ability to edit would fix typos (remember “covfefe”?) and allow people to change their minds after sending, say, offensive tweets.

When Jack Dorsey was CEO, he resisted the idea, and Twitter made this joke about wearing masks. After all, the platform was designed like a text messaging service, and texts cannot be changed. The company viewed editing as an issue of integrity.

The company will keep a history of tweets, so editing creates a new one without deleting the original. This seems to be a good compromise and still meets users’ many requests for the feature.

Confusing Airbnb Message

Informational messages should be straightforward, but Airbnb sent one that confused hosts and former hosts. I received this email about taxes with the subject, “Action required: Provide missing taxpayer info.” The tone is threatening, and I wasn’t sure whether this applied to my recent international booking or a remnant from my hosting days, although I stopped in 2018.

Apparently, I wasn’t alone. Within two days, I received the second message, “Clarification regarding taxpayer information request.”

My guess is that the message inadvertently went to people who are no longer hosting. The second message could have admitted the mistake but didn’t. Instead of demonstrating accountability and humility, the author wrote, “We wanted to clarify that this action is not required for everyone.”





Persuasive Messaging About Permanent Daylight Saving Time

U.S. lawmakers will debate the Sunshine Protection Act, which would make daylight saving time permanent—no more falling back or springing ahead. The Act name, emphasizing more sunshine, is a lesson in framing. If we keep daylight saving time year round, we’ll get more light in the evenings, but we’ll lose light in the mornings. An NBC writer jokes that it should be called the Rising in Darkness Act.

A Wall Street Journal article describes opposing arguments. One of the biggest downsides is that children will travel to school in the dark, which could lead to accidents. Others cite three previous tries to move to a permanent daylight saving time—all reversed.

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) strongly opposes the Act. In a statement, the group supports a permanent time but writes that the better choice is standard time, with more light in the mornings. They cite research that standard time “aligns best with human circadian biology and provides distinct benefits for public health and safety” compared to daylight savings’ “increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events, mood disorders, and motor vehicle crashes.”

Both AASM statements, linked above, are good examples of concise communication and clear organization. I question the organization around “acute” and “chronic” impacts and would favor main point headings, but the argument is short and easy to read for laypeople—the primary audience.

Image source.

Starbucks Announces CEO Transition

After 13 years at Starbucks, including five as CEO and president, Kevin Johnson will retire. Company founder Howard Schultz will serve as interim executive as the search for a replacement begins.

The company statement includes the typical quotes: the board chair complimenting Johnson’s accomplishments, Johnson expressing pride and gratitude, and Schultz providing a vision. Of course, the company doesn’t explicitly address two of the biggest challenges Schultz will face, which a Wall Street Journal article calls out in the headline, “Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz to Return as Chain Faces Union Push, Rising Costs.”

Shares declined 24% in the past year, and it’s been a rough time for the company, as for all restaurants trying to regain their footing after the pandemic amidst rising prices, staffing shortages, and wage increases. In the statement, Johnson says that he notified the board a year ago of his plan to leave, and the WSJ article confirms the story with a quote from the board chair, “His decision to leave was his own, not the result of any board or outside push, she said.”

We’ll never know the truth, and expecting full transparency in these situations isn’t realistic. Perhaps it’s a mix, anyway. The board may want a leadership change to address difficult issues, including improving relations with employees and unions, and Johnson felt internal and external pressure to leave.

Image source.

Advice for Resignation Emails

A Wall Street Journal article suggests ways to resign from your job gracefully. With a wave of post-pandemic departures, we’re seeing all sorts of resignation messages, some more appropriate than others. The string of emails can be disheartening for people who decide to stay, and leavers should be mindful of burning bridges they may want to walk across in the future.

A law career coach advises that people “Let it rip. Let everything out”—in a document that you don’t send. Then, send an email that respects the workplace and the people you’ll leave behind:

“For the real deal, be gracious and express gratitude. Include up to three career highlights. (Any more and you risk being seen as a braggart.) And skip the passive-aggressive jabs.”

I hadn’t thought about including career highlights, and I wonder whether coworkers would appreciate reading them. Instead, I suggest observing what other resignation emails include and following suit. Every workplace has its own norms around these types of messages.

I do agree with this advice:

“By giving your notice, ‘the power dynamic has been leveled.’ Use that new sense of control and confidence to share more authentically about yourself, not torpedo your relationships on the way out the door.”

The coach is right: you made your decision and are burdening your manager and coworkers who will pick up the slack. Now’s the time to demonstrate humility instead of rubbing it in and causing more hurt feelings.

Peloton's New Ad Campaign

Peloton is trying for a comeback with a new ad campaign. After losing market share, market value, a CEO, a couple of fictional characters, and about 2,800 jobs, the company needs a boost, but the latest campaign feels, to me, defensive and, dare I say, desperate.

Ads quote negative views of the company and counter with positive quotes, presumably from people who have been converted. For persuasive communication, research supports acknowledging opposing sides, even hostile points of view, and then arguing against them. But the counter-quotes in these ads represent one person’s opinion and may not provide enough evidence to outweigh the introductory quote, which seems to represent many.

I also wonder whether Peloton—without providing more evidence—might inadvertently reinforce negative perceptions of the company and products. Introductory quotes refer to Peloton as a fad, a cult, elitist, a scam, an easy workout, and an overpriced coatrack. These are all good reasons for me to never buy a Peloton.

The ads seem to disregard real challenges. The quotes represent good feedback for company leaders who, in response, defend rather than try to change the brand.

Zillow's Letter to Shareholders

Zillow ended its failed iBuying business, but is recovering well, as the latest letter to shareholders explains. A foray into the home-flipping business didn’t pan out for the company, resulting in losses and layoffs.

The company’s letter demonstrates accountability, humility, and vulnerability, yet express optimism, as the CEO and CFO write in the closing:

“We want to acknowledge the past few months have been challenging for us all — Zillow leadership, employees, and investors — but innovation is a bumpy road. Big swings are core to Zillow, and they are what make our company so unique. We are excited about the opportunity in front of us. Thank you for joining us on this journey.”

In addition to describing plans, the leaders want readers to take away that performance was “better than expected.” “Better” is used 13 times in the 20-page letter. The approach seemed to work. As a CNBC article summarizes, “Zillow soars on upbeat outlook and faster-than-expected selloff of homes in portfolio.” However, for perspective, the article reports that the stock increased 20% after the letter was published, yet “the stock has lost three-quarters of its value since reaching a record almost a year ago.” Zillow’s leaders have more work to do.

Announcements About Leader Departures

Company announcements about leader departures typically follow a standard format, but content and medium choices communicate history and context. Two recent examples illustrate these types of messages:

  • Meta, Facebook’s parent, announced that Peter Thiel, a long-time investor, will step down from the board. The company chose a press release for the news, also posted on the Meta website. As expected, the press release includes positive quotes from CEO Mark Zuckerberg and from Thiel. What’s not said is found in a Wall Street Journal article: Thiel is a supporter of former President Trump and two Senate candidates who have spread false claims about election fraud. Thiel has also resisted changes to Facebook to quell misinformation on the platform.

  • Peloton announced that John Foley, the company founder, will step down. Like Meta, the company chose a press release and posted it on the Peloton website. Although the statement names Foley as executive chair and includes a quote from him, we don’t see the typical complimentary quote about his leadership. A New York Times article titled, “Peloton’s Future Is Uncertain After a Swift Fall from Pandemic Stardom,” cites several problems at the company: “The chief executive stepped down as a glut of unsold machines, negative TV portrayals, activist investors, and a recall plagued the fitness company.” A personal message, below, from Foley to Peloton customers explains more of his perspective.

These messages are a type of bad news—and they are examples of persuasive communication. Foley’s email tries to convince “members” that the company will continue to thrive and that Barry McCarthy, as the new CEO and president, is the answer. Foley uses logical arguments, such as the number of current users, and credibility, such as McCarthy’s past success, to persuade. He also uses emotional appeals, complimenting customers and their stories. He reassures customers by describing what won’t change—a persuasive strategy Adam Grant talks about in his book Think Again.

Whether Foley remains with the company—and what the future of the company holds—is questionable. In his email, he demonstrates some humility by introducing McCarthy but little accountability for what has happened to a company that was only recently a major success story.

Fellow Members,

There’s been quite a bit of news about Peloton in recent weeks, and through it all, you have stood with us. Thank you for all your support and encouragement! This year marks Peloton’s 10 year anniversary. My co-founders and I brought to life the concept of recreating the energy and benefits of a studio fitness class in the home to make getting healthy and staying healthy more achievable for more people. And together with you, we have built this incredible community from five people to 6.6 Million people, of all stages, ages, and backgrounds, leading healthier, happier lives. I remain inspired by you and your stories. Our north star has always been and will always be improving the lives of our Members. Your experience is what matters most and this is why we are making some changes to position Peloton for continued success the next 10 years and beyond.

Effective today, I will be moving into a new role as Executive Chair, and Barry McCarthy will be joining Peloton as CEO & President to lead the company. Barry is an incredible leader with a proven track record of working with founders to scale world-class businesses like Spotify and Netflix. In addition to the senior executive roles he has held at some of the world’s most successful media and entertainment brands, Barry has served as an advisor and board member at public and private technology companies. This appointment is the culmination of a months-long succession plan that I’ve been working on with our Board of Directors, and we are thrilled to have found in Barry the perfect leader for the next chapter of Peloton.

I care deeply about Peloton – our community, our team, and our ability to continue to motivate and inspire you through our world-class instructors and deep library of classes across fitness disciplines. And, because operating with a Members-first approach is one of our core values, I want to assure you that the changes that we’re making at the company across our operations will not impact our instructor roster, number of classes produced, or range of class modalities.

I still believe as strongly in this brand and in connected fitness as I did on Day One. But in order for us to continue to deliver the best possible member experience and lead us into the future, I need to hand the day-to-day reins of running the business to a seasoned and gifted executive who has helped transform and grow some of the world’s best streaming media companies – first in video, then in music, now in connected fitness.

I’m so excited to partner with Barry and for you to see what he brings to this brand and community. Please join me in welcoming him to the Peloton team. And I hope to see you on the leaderboard soon!

John Foley

Arguments in the Joe Rogan, Spotify Situation

A few musicians and podcast creators are leaving Spotify over controversy about “The Joe Rogan Experience,” a popular show that has included misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations. Comparing messages from different points of view is an interesting look at persuasive arguments and raises issues of character. Here are a few to explore:

  • Spotify’s stance is explained in this statement and may be summarized as follows from the chief executive and co-founder: “I think the important part here is that we don’t change our policies based on one creator nor do we change it based on any media cycle, or calls from anyone else.” Spotify also created a COVID information hub.

  • Neil Young removed his music, which had hundreds of millions of views, and explained his rationale in a letter (since removed from his website): “I am doing this because Spotify is spreading fake information about vaccines—potentially causing death to those who believe the disinformation being spread by them.”

  • Crosby, Stills, and Nash followed suit and posted their reason on Twitter: “We support Neil and agree with him that there is dangerous disinformation being aired on Spotify’s Joe Rogan podcast. While we always value alternate points of view, knowingly spreading disinformation during this global pandemic has deadly consequences. Until real action is taken to show that a concern for humanity must be balanced with commerce, we don’t want our music—or the music we made together—to be on the same platform.”

  • Roxane Gay explained her decision to remove “The Roxane Gay Agenda” in a New York Times opinion letter. In closing, she wrote, “I am not trying to impede anyone’s freedom to speak. Joe Rogan and others like him can continue to proudly encourage misinformation and bigotry to vast audiences. They will be well rewarded for their efforts. The platforms sharing these rewards can continue to look the other way. But today at least, I won’t.”

  • Bréne Brown “paused” her two podcasts and wrote that she is waiting for more information: “I’ve enjoyed the creative collaboration with Spotify, and I appreciate how the leadership has shown up in our meetings over the past week. Now that Spotify has published its misinformation policy, and the policy itself appears to address the majority of my concerns, I’m in the process of learning how the policy will be applied. I’m hopeful that the podcasts will be back next week.” As you might expect, Brown demonstrates vulnerability, including negative, personal comments she has received about the issue.

  • Joe Rogan apologized in a 10-minute Instagram video, promising to “balance out viewpoints with other people’s perspectives.”

UPDATE: A video compilation of Rogan using a racial slur has emerged, and he apologized—again.

BlackRock CEO Defends Focus

Investment firm BlackRock has pushed companies to pursue a social purpose in addition to profits. The chief executive’s annual letter to investors defends this approach, which has been criticized as anti-business.

Up front in the title, “The Power of Capitalism,” Larry Fink addresses criticism head on and further explains in the letter:

“Stakeholder capitalism is not about politics. It is not a social or ideological agenda. It is not ‘woke.’ It is capitalism, driven by mutually beneficial relationships between you and the employees, customers, suppliers, and communities your company relies on to prosper. This is the power of capitalism.”

Fink states his belief clearly in the last paragraph:

“…it is more important than ever that your company and its management be guided by its purpose. If you stay true to your company's purpose and focus on the long term, while adapting to this new world around us, you will deliver durable returns for shareholders and help realize the power of capitalism for all.”

The letter illustrates persuasive communication, focusing not on emotional appeal but logical arguments. For his audience, which he defines at the beginning as CEOs, he encourages a commitment to purpose—for leaders to let stakeholders “know where we stand on the societal issues intrinsic to our companies’ long-term success.” He writes “long-term” 18 times in the letter, using repetition to drive the point home. Fink illustrates a few leadership character dimensions, for example, authenticity, integrity, and courage.

Strong Tone in Activist Investor Letters

Two recent letters illustrate strong language in persuasive messages to boards of directors:

  • Blackwells, which owns less than 5% of Peloton, is calling for the board to remove CEO John Foley and to sell the company. A Fortune article provides background, but the letter, as are most activist investor letters, is quite explicit. Jason Aintabi, chief investment officer for Blackwells, cites “multiple leadership failures,” blaming Foley for the company’s decline. With strong language throughout, Aintabi ends the letter with a pun intended, “The ride for Mr. Foley is over. This Board must now independently chart a new path for Peloton.”

  • Engine Capital wants the Kohl’s board of directors to evaluate the ecommerce business separately and to consider selling the company. The letter comes after a Starboard Value bid to buy the company. The tone of this letter is just as strong as the Blackwells letter about Peloton, but it’s less personal about the CEO. Still, Engine implores the board, “As we will show, there is no excuse for the Board to cling to the status quo.”

Both letters are good examples of tone in context. Of course, investors are not required to be so blatant, but the language is typical—and likely expected—for such demands to be considered credible and to be taken seriously.

Misrepresenting COVID-19 Study Findings

A study about COVID testing in schools is criticized for its authors’ conclusions. Researchers at Duke, in collaboration with the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, studied the “test-to-stay” approach for schoolchildren. With this approach, if a child tests negative after being exposed to someone who tests positive, that child can go to school. Researchers found this strategy to be effective in getting kids back to school—without increasing COVID transmissions.

The trouble, described in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, is that authors concluded, “in schools with universal masking, test-to-stay is an effective strategy.” The writers explain their thinking:

“That invites readers to assume that test-to-stay doesn’t work without forced masking. But since they studied no unmasked schools, this conclusion is baseless. An honest report would either have said so or not mentioned masking at all.”

The writers believe that study authors are pushing their own agenda for schools to require masking. This is a good example of a study interpretation that is technically correct but omits important information for a fair comparison. In such cases, researchers might hurt their own credibility. On the other hand, do people assume, as the writers say, that “test to stay” doesn’t work in schools without mask mandates?

Company Responses to Tornado

An Amazon warehouse in Illinois and a candle factory in Kentucky seem to be the companies hardest hit by a devastating tornado. Although an easy target for critics, Amazon, and particularly CEO Jeff Bezos, probably could do more. Twitter comments called out his response as a “template” and “corporate line.” One wrote, “Literally a day late and a dollar short.” Further damaging his reputation as a compassionate leader, and by unfortunate coincidence, Blue Origin, Bezos’s company, launched six paying passengers into space on the day of the tornado.

Perhaps nothing Bezos said would have been right, or enough. In a news conference, Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker said he “implored” Amazon “to stand up for this community to make sure that the families get whatever they need in this community, and they’ve offered to do so.” I have not found statements from Amazon about what that support might include.

The Kentucky factory, Mayfield Consumer Products, was “destroyed,” according to the website landing page. The CEO posted a brief statement, promising more information once known and promoting a victims’ fund. We see character and culture in both company responses.

Emojis at Work

Should you use emojis in work emails? A Wall Street Journal writer says no based on a 2020 Computers in Human Behavior study about how women interpret the symbols.

Psychology researchers at Wayne State University found that women interpret negative emojis more negatively than do men. For example, the lead author described reactions to the thinking emoji: “Men see that as slightly positive, women as slightly negative.”

However, college students were the subjects in this study, and the authors say the results are consistent with the emotional negative bias. They describe the bias and explain that it is greater in women than in men: “young adults exhibit greater attention and memory for negative over positive information.” The bias lessens as people turn middle-aged, and then a positivity bias is more prevalent.

So, you might consider the age of your coworkers as you decide whether to use emojis. One function of emojis is to convey subtle emotion when words alone fail. But they may be just as confusing and open to interpretation as text.