network

Patrice Peyret: Why you should care about hidden interchange fees in 2011

December 29, 2010

On December 16, 2010, The Federal Reserve Board proposed a new rule that would lower by as much as 84 percent the $16.2 billion in fees that merchants pay annually when you swipe your debit card at their cash registers. ( The Fed asked for public comments on the proposal by February 22, 2011 .) The idea is that merchants will save money and pass along savings to you. Immediately, large U.S. banks and credit card issuers attacked the proposed rules as a threat to their industry, a handout to merchants who get out of paying their fair share of money network costs, and a booby-prize for consumers who gain no assurance of savings but almost surely would face higher banking fees. See ” Debit Card Fee Cap Could Mean Higher Prices for Consumers ” Behind the proposed new rules and the arguments against them are some key questions: Why should you care? What are the real costs? Who should pay? Why Care? According to the Fed, debit card use in the United States now exceeds all other forms of noncash payments. The interchange fee that merchants pay when you use your debit card is largely hidden from you, but it funds a network of technology and services that ensure you can trust using your debit card without risking your bank account. Like all infrastructure, this network requires money to build, maintain, operate and improve. Banks will not operate these networks for free, so if merchants pay less, it’s likely that you will pay more, either directly or indirectly, to use your debit cards. What does it cost to operate? The new Fed proposal caps the fee for running a debit card transaction at between 7 and 12 cents, a huge reduction from the average of 44 cents per transaction charged currently. That’s the Fed’s estimate of costs. The real costs are much harder to measure. These technology costs are fairly easy to estimate. No physical money actually moves when you swipe your debit card at the store. Only digital information gets exchanged between the merchant’s bank and your bank. In this way, the debit card network is kind of like the wireless phone network that carries text messages from phone to phone. What’s difficult to measure is the cost of security, reliability and exception handling. If money was lost or misrouted at the same rate as text messages, we would all be stashing hard cash under our mattresses. For reliability, the banks use debit networks operated by Visa, MasterCard and others, and they are good. Even during the week before Christmas, the networks route card transactions from anywhere in the world to anywhere else in under two seconds. More importantly, the network operators handle problems. You can’t unsend a text message, but you can reverse a debit payment. And you can get help on the phone when you need it. Although banks’ customer service isn’t always perfect, the rules and processes for handling mistaken or fraudulent card transactions work well enough for us to trust the banks with our money. The reason it’s hard to measure support costs when there’s a problem is that no fewer than three parties are involved: the merchant’s bank, your bank, and the payment network in the middle. Unlike the decreasing costs of transmitting bits of information across digital networks, the human-intensive costs of managing fraud risks and providing customer support have increased. Factoring the human costs across three levels of intermediaries is very nearly impossible. Who should pay? And how much? It’s good to pry open the debit card to improve transparency and foster more competition. But I was surprised that the Fed picked such a low range — 7 to 12 cents — as an interchange cap while admitting that it had not considered all aspects of the problem (such as customer support costs) and was not sure if it would serve the interest of consumers. The proposed cap is not a good first step. It will surely ignite an endless debate by less-than-candid incumbents about why the chosen number is wrong. It also avoids the question of who will pay the debit network operating costs if the merchants don’t do so? The banks aren’t interested in losing money, so it’s reasonable to assume the consumers would pick up the merchant’s share by some means or another. I’m curious about a different approach based on positive pricing and transparency. Today, banks use a form of negative or “penalty pricing” in which they offer you “free” checking accounts and debit cards but make money from your mistakes in the form of overdraft fees and such. Instead of penalizing you for mistakes, what if banks offered a menu of services that you chose to pay for upfront, including a small price for using your debit card? You could shop around for the best deals and know you’re not going to get hit with hidden fees. It would help fund the cost of operating debit networks while relieving merchants — many of them small, local stores – of bearing the full cost of the network. There are complications to a positive pricing approach, but overall, letting you see what you’re actually paying and giving you the choices must be better than meddling with behind-the-scenes fees in ways that you’ll probably end up paying for anyway. Disclosure: I am CEO of Plastyc , a company that offers prepaid card services (prepaid cards are a sub-category of debit cards). My company is not directly affected by the proposed interchange rules, which only apply to prepaid card issuers with assets of $10 billion or more.

Read the full article →

Tom Doctoroff: The Chinese Consumer: Still Projecting and Protecting

December 29, 2010

Contemporary Chinese society, still Confucian to the core, is driven by: 1) the need for societal acknowledgment and 2) diffused insecurity. Mainland consumer behavior, characterized by status projection and risk avoidance, reflects these truths. Status and Public Consumption. The Chinese consumer, pulled between conformism and ambition, regard brands as tools for success, not self-actualization or fulfillment. Publicly consumed products command huge price premiums relative to goods used in private. All leading mobile phones, for example, are international. Even in tier five and six cities, Nokia commands a 40% market share, despite significantly higher retail prices relative to local competitors. Sony’s Handycam, a product brandished outside the home, boasts 50% market share. However, Sony televisions are still niche. The leading household appliances are, without exception, cheap domestic brands such as Haier, TCL and Changhong. The “public display” imperative leads to fundamental positioning differences versus what works in Western markets. Benefits should be “externalized,” not “internalized.” Even for luxury goods, individualism — “what I want, how I feel” — does not work. Shower gels should not promote “sensory indulgence.” They should help a woman begin the day with a kick. Beauty products must help “move her forward,” “get her man,” or “open doors.” Automobiles, now a middle-class “must buy,” should make a statement about a man on the way up. Sports cars — “thrill vehicles” — are not big sellers. BMW, a middle kingdom winner, has fused its global “Ultimate Driving Machine” proposition with a Chinese declaration of ambition. Passat, Honda, Toyota, Ford and Buick are also positioned as status vessels. Even beer must do something. In Western countries, “letting the goods times role,” or “making weekends great” is enough. Fun is fun. In China, Pilsner must: 1) bring people together, 2) reinforce trust, and 3) optimize opportunity for mutual (financial) gain. The importance of public display is also a critical consideration in shaping business models. Starbucks in China is not a comfortable environment — i.e., an urban retreat — in which coffee is sipped. To conform to Chinese taste, the company: 1) broadened the sandwich menu, 2) identified prime site-to-be-seen real estate, and 3) expanded average store size. From day one, it successfully established itself as a public place in which professional tribes gather proclaim affiliation with the new generation elite. Both Pizza Hut and Haagen Dazs have built mega-franchises based on out-of-home consumption. Insecurity and Price Sensitivity. The Chinese still do not feel “safe.” On a daily basis, they confront: shredded safety nets, lack of institutions that protect individual wealth, contaminated dairy products and other risks to home and health. Therefore, consumers’ instinct to project status through material display is counter-balanced by conservative buying behavior, at all socio-economic levels. Protective “benefits” are fundamental. Even high-end paints must establish anti-toxicity before move on to “colorful” self-expression. Baby formula, rooted in immunity claims, commands huge price premiums in both middle class and mass markets. Chinese on average take ten times as many antibiotics as people in other countries. Safety is a key benefit for Mercedes and Ford Fiesta buyers alike. The Chinese will never spend freely. Savings rates will always be higher than in the West. There is no question China’s consumer economy will expand as incomes rise. So will purchasing power. (In most urban areas, homelessness is not a major problem. There are beggars but not many.) But price-sensitivity runs deep because the average Joe is skittish about keeping up. One anonymous viral e-mail that made the rounds in late-2010 as inflation was picking up steam said it all: “Can’t afford to be born because a Caesarean costs RMB50,000; can’t afford to study because schools cost at least RMB30,000; can’t afford to live anywhere because each square meter is at least RMB20,000; can’t afford to get sick because pharmaceutical profits are at least 10-fold; can’t afford to die because cremation costs at least RMB30,000.” Beyond ever-rising prices, investment opportunities are limited; the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets are riskier than gambling casinos. To boot, health care is a tattered quilt of patchy coverage. (Low-paid surgeons receive bribes from patients and kick backs from drug manufacturers.) Even wealthy consumers are wed to cash. They shy away from multiple credit cards and on-line “virtual” transactions. Most cars are still purchased without loans. New Media, Traditional Values. Finally, digital technology has not transformed consumer behavior at an elemental level. “Young China” is savvier than a decade ago. New media has broadened awareness of the outside world. However, Chinese netizens’ underlying conservatism is clear. First, on-line transactions are relatively infrequent, particularly when compared to the high levels of digital penetration in major cities and, increasingly, smaller towns. According to the China Internet Network Information Center, by 2008, only 25% of Internet users have bought something online, and most of these purchases involve off-line cash-for-product exchanges. The barriers are no longer technological; people simply do not feel “safe” making electronic payments. Safety-seeking China is “high touch”; tires must be kicked. Second, so-called digital liberation is anonymous. Social networking sites such as Weibo (China’s Twitter) and Kaixing Wang (China’s Facebook) are popular platforms of self-expression. But even the angriest on-line protesters hide behind avatars and pseudonyms. To quote one on-line gaming fan: “I can be gay. I can be king of darkness. I can be whoever I want to be because no one knows who I am.” A joint survey conducted by JWT and IAC supports the importance of on-line anonymity. In response to the statement, “I feel free to do and say things I wouldn’t do or say offline,” less than a third of young Americans agree and a large majority (41%) disagrees. Among Chinese respondents, almost three-quarters agree (73%), and just 9% disagree. Consumer culture is advancing. But buying decisions will always reflect Chinese cultural realities.

Read the full article →

Net Neutrality Rules Poised To Pass FCC Tomorrow

December 20, 2010

WASHINGTON — New rules aimed at prohibiting broadband providers from becoming gatekeepers of Internet traffic now have just enough votes to pass the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday. The rules would prohibit phone and cable companies from abusing their control over broadband connections to discriminate against rival content or services, such as Internet phone calls or online video, or play favorites with Web traffic. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski now has the three votes needed for approval, despite firm opposition from the two Republicans on the five-member commission. Genachowski’s two fellow Democrats said Monday they will vote for the rules, even though they consider them too weak. The outcome caps a nearly-16-month push by Genachowski to pass “network neutrality” rules and marks a key turning point in a policy dispute that began more than five years ago. “The open Internet is a crucial American marketplace, and I believe that it is appropriate for the FCC to safeguard it by adopting an order that will establish clear rules to protect consumers’ access,” Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, a Democrat, said in a statement. Yet many supporters of network neutrality are disappointed. Clyburn and the other Democrat, Michael Copps, both said the rules are not as strong as they would like, even after Genachowski made some changes to address their concerns. That sentiment was echoed by some public interest groups on Tuesday. “The actions by the Federal Communications Commission fall far short of what they could have been,” said Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge. “Instead of strong, firm rules providing clear protections, the commission, created a vague and shifting landscape open to interpretation.” A number of big Internet companies, including Netflix Inc., Skype and Amazon.com Inc., have previously expressed reservations about the proposal as well. Meanwhile, even the weakened rules are likely to face intense scrutiny as soon as the Republicans take over the House next year. The chairman’s proposal builds on an attempt at compromise crafted by outgoing House Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., as well as a set of broad net neutrality principles first established by the FCC under the previous administration in 2005. The rules would require broadband providers to let subscribers access all legal online content, applications and services over their wired networks – including online calling services, Internet video and other Web applications that compete with their core businesses. But the plan would give broadband providers flexibility to manage data on their systems to deal with problems such as network congestion and unwanted traffic like spam as long as they publicly disclose their network management practices. Senior FCC officials stressed that unreasonable network discrimination would be prohibited. They also noted that this category would most likely include services that favor traffic from the broadband providers themselves or traffic from business partners that can pay for priority. That language was added to help ease the concerns of Genachowski’s two fellow Deomcrats. The proposal would, however, leave the door open for broadband providers to experiment with routing traffic from specialized services such as smart grids and home security systems over dedicated networks as long as these services are separate from the public Internet. Public interest groups fear that exception could lead to a two-tiered Internet with a fast lane for companies that can pay for priority and a slow lane for everyone else. They are also worried that the proposal lacks strong protections for wireless networks as more Americans go online using mobile devices. The plan would prohibit wireless carriers from blocking access to any websites or competing applications such as Internet calling services on mobile devices. It would require them to disclose their network management practices too. But wireless companies would get more flexibility to manage data traffic as wireless systems have more bandwidth constraints than wired networks. “Individuals who depend on wireless connections to the Internet can take no comfort in this half-measure,” said Joel Kelsey, political advisor for the public interest group Free Press. Republicans, meanwhile, warn that the new rules would impose unnecessary regulations on an industry that is one of the few bright spots in the current economy, with phone and cable companies spending billions to upgrade their networks for broadband. Burdensome net neutrality rules, they warn, would discourage broadband providers from continuing those upgrades by making it difficult for them to earn a healthy return on their investments. Still, Genachowski’s proposal is likely to win the support of the big phone and cable companies because it leaves in place the FCC’s current regulatory framework for broadband, which treats broadband as a lightly regulated “information service.” The agency had tried to come up with a new framework after a federal appeals court in April ruled that the FCC had overstepped its existing authority in sanctioning Comcast Corp. for discriminating against online file-sharing traffic on its network – violating the very net neutrality principles that underpin the new rules. Comcast argued that the service, which was used to trade movies and other big files over the Internet, was clogging its network. To ensure that the commission would be on solid legal ground in adopting net neutrality rules and other broadband regulations following that decision, Genachowski had proposed redefining broadband as a telecommunications service subject to “common carrier” obligations to treat all traffic equally. But Genachowski backed down after strong opposition from the phone and cable companies, as well as many Republicans in Congress.

Read the full article →

Hamish McLennan: Making the Left- & Right-Brain Work Together: It’s Good Business

December 20, 2010

Over the past few years, the business of marketing is being driven by two seemingly contradictory impulses. On the one hand, the digital world has helped carry the banner of accountability, with its data-driven intelligence-gathering proficiencies. But at the same time, marketers who need to reach customers know painfully well that engaging consumers is not only what you know, but how you express it. The need to creatively connect with our clients’ customers has never been stronger. And so we have been watching the see-saw of left-brain, right-brain thinking. Digital companies have proliferated. But so have the “idea” shops. This dichotomization has been the hallmark of much of the business world. As I look towards 2012 and beyond, it’s becoming clear that the path to long-term business growth is the seamless melding of left- and right-brain thinking. Everyone needs to sit at the same table. Indeed, using that tension of striking a right balance between the best creative and business minds from the beginning of every project is the key to success in today’s ever-changing media landscape. The Daily is Setting the Perfect Example I believe The Daily, the first newspaper designed specifically for the Ipad — and a left-brain/right-brain venture– will become the fastest-growing APP ever. An archetype for future publications? No doubt. A game-changer for the business world? Perhaps. There’s lots of evidence. It starts from the top — a truly interesting match of minds, exemplified by the partnership of News Corp’s Rupert Murdoch and Apple’s Steve Jobs. Both visionaries, but unmistakably different kinds of thinkers. Murdoch brings his great passion for newspapers. Steve Jobs brings the most buzzed-about new consumer platform, the iPad. They are attracting an incredible level of talent on a daily basis. Right from the start, however, Murdoch and Jobs have insisted on one thing. The business side is working side-by-side with the best creative and editorial minds in the business. Not on a need-to-know basis, but as an ensemble act. They know they will be better together. Striking a balance between the left-brain and right-brain is our business model at Young & Rubicam. It is how we work for and with our clients. Just today, we helped our client, the consumer electronics giant, LG, launch an innovative, interactive digital billboard in New York’s Times Square dedicated entirely to good news. LG’s data showed an overwhelming majority of Americans — 83%, in fact — feel that they are suffering from a good news deficit, with six in 10 Americans, saying they don’t even know where to look for good news. With a brand motto of “Life’s Good,” LG’s good news billboard, which you can tweet and text and be answered by an animated good news ambassador, is a complex and elaborate dance of innovative technology and imagination. And within the first hour that it went live, the billboard became the conduit of a marriage proposal. What’s Next? I can’t help but think that the left-brain and right-brain approach is the ideal cultural blueprint for innovative corporations around the world in 2011. The most interesting part, of course, is that there is no exact plan for executing this philosophy. Companies will have to find ways to merge the two ways of thinking that work best for them — and that’s the key to long-term success. Hamish McClennan is the global CEO of Young & Rubicam, the youngest person to hold the post in its history, and the first CEO from the Asia-Pacific Region. Its 186 agencies in 81 countries and whole brain philosophy have contributed to its huge creative and client successes this year. The agency was #1 in the US at Cannes and #3 in the world, there. Y&R was named the Network of the Year three times and was the most-awarded agency at major regional competitions, as well.

Read the full article →

Jack Myers: Market Share Winners and Losers: Media, Advertising and Marketing (2000-2020)

December 14, 2010

Contrary to popular Wall Street and Madison Avenue perception, broadcast networks’ share of marketers’ total communications expenditures will actually increase 25% between 2010 and 2020. Marketers’ investments in cable network television will increase in market share more than 150% between 2000 and 2020. While actual dollar expenditures are the most relevant data point, a view of projected share of market gains and losses over a 20 year period offers a far more focused perspective on the realities of the media and advertising transformation occurring between 2000 and 2020. An exclusive report published this week by Jack Myers Media Business Report provides detailed data on market share shift between 2000 and 2020 for 29 media and marketing categories. Jack Myers Media Business Report is underwritten by more than 100 leading media companies, agencies, marketers, research firms and investment analysts. The Myers data confirms the positive outlook on broadcast and cable network television offered last week by industry executives at the UBS Global Media Conference . The following is a summary of some of Myers’ core economic insights on the share of market shift from 2000 to 2010 and forecasts for 2010 to 2020. Jack Myers Media Business Report Share of Total Marketing Communications Expenditures 2000 to 2020

Read the full article →

Kevin Lawton: The Crowdfunding Revolution Will Democratize Venture Investing

December 8, 2010

It’s no secret that venture capital and angel investing is ‘clubby,’ dominated mostly by middle-aged men. According to a 2007 study of angel investors in North America, 86 percent were male with an average age of 57. Women didn’t fare any better in a similar UK study , where 93 percent of investors were male. A similar trend exists on the entrepreneur side: only eight percent of companies that receive venture capital funding are run by women. While the VC community seems stuck in an old boys network mentality, crowdfunding is radically re-shaping business investment and neutralizing gender bias, for both investors and entrepreneurs. According to Danae Ringelmann, co-founder of crowdfunding site IndieGoGo , 42 percent of successful funding campaigns are women-led. That’s nearly identical to the 41 percent of small businesses in the US which are run by women. Still, most of the current crowdfunding options are non-equity based due to SEC registration requirements, as mentioned in my previous post . Essentially, a U.S. entrepreneur who sells equity in their company online or offline must live under exemptions provided by Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933. These exemptions say that entrepreneurs can approach friends, family and accredited investors for funding, but not the general public . That’s quite unfortunate, as equity financing is well matched for the risk-vs-reward mechanics of seed stage investing. And seed represents a sizable financing hole between $25,000 and $2 million, which is the gap between self-funding and where venture capital takes an interest. According to this Dartmouth study , “only 1% to 2% of all business plans presented to either angels or VCs receive funding.” That’s why the system at large is trying so hard to bust out of the shackles of the old modes of financing. At the low end of the financing curve, crowdfunding is creating a vibrant way to launch small projects and businesses, especially those with smaller capital needs. But as one pushes further up in seed funding needs, equity financing becomes increasingly more important. Investors need more upside potential to balance out the higher risks of investing in pre-revenue ventures. So it’s great to see the newly launched Crowdcube (U.K. only), which will allow funders to purchase equity in startups, although they need to be friends and family. There are other upcoming efforts in Europe which also allow equity funding. Unfortunately, the U.S. is absent in equity crowdfunding, largely due to the SEC. SEC regulations that outlaw general solicitation are in place to protect unsophisticated investors from fraud. But it’s easy to see how banning general solicitation is the wrong approach and contradicts policies that permit other investment activities. Just look at “penny stocks,” which are publicly traded stocks with per-share prices below $5, often less than $1. In a portfolio of penny stocks, some will lose most or all of their value (roughly 10 to 20 percent on average), some will perform decently, and others will increase by 10 times or more. Despite the high risk, penny stocks have fewer reporting requirements than typical stocks, and are legally traded by the general public. To manage risk, investors hold a diversified portfolio. And, in the case of penny stocks, diversification is a best practice and an education thing, not a regulatory issue. Penny stocks have a risk profile that is very similar to investments in early startups: 40 percent, according to this study , lead to a zero return, some yield mediocre returns, and a very small percentage of VC investments in startups yield big returns. If you plotted returns of industry-wide seed stage investments and penny stocks, they’d look very similar. It makes sense, then, that the risks are managed in a similar fashion. Investors of early startups shouldn’t put all of their money in any one investment. Rather, they should hold a diversified basket of startup investments. If they do, a systemic level of 1 or 2 percent fraud is nearly irrelevant. This is why the argument for the ban on the general public investing in startups doesn’t hold up. And crowdfunding offers something further, with its strong elements of social networking. Opening the funding process to the general public adds transparency and trust signaling. It’s much harder for fraud to occur when the whole world is watching, especially with credibility and performance ratings. Raising money nearly always requires using a first-level network as a trust signal to drive the network effect. No trust circle equals no funding. As various countries adopt more powerful forms of crowdfunding, they will reap the economic benefits. But beyond this new funding model is a revolution in gender equality for entrepreneurs and investors. I discuss a much deeper and broader look at the crowdfunding phenomenon in my book, The Crowdfunding Revolution .

Read the full article →

Timothy Karr: Who Will Head MSNBC if Comcast Takes Over?

November 9, 2010

And Why That Poses an Even Bigger Threat to Keith Olbermann Keith Olbermann is back, and for his many fans, including the 300,000 who petitioned MSNBC to reinstate him, it would seem a return to form. But Olbermann’s dispute with the brass at MSNBC may only serve as a prelude to more troubled times. MSNBC’s parent company, NBC Universal, is likely to be taken over by cable giant Comcast, should regulators sign off on the $30 billion deal. If history is any guide, this merger poses an even bigger threat to the future of MSNBC personalities like Olbermann and Rachel Maddow than the recent dustup that temporarily sidelined the host. That’s why tens of thousands have already urged the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice to stop the merger. They cite a multitude of reasons the takeover would bring them harm, including higher prices and fewer choices in programming and services. Indeed, such concentration of media power leads to a less vigilant news media, a muted marketplace of ideas and fewer consumer options at a time when are demanding more. Add to this the dim but real prospect that MSNBC’s new boss will be even less welcoming than the current one to commentators that rock the boat. Just consider the candidates in line to take over MSNBC: Steve Burke, Comcast’s Chief Operating Officer According to The Street , Steve Burke will take NBC’s CEO spot from Jeff Zucker should the merger be approved. In an e-mail to colleagues , Zucker said: “Comcast will be a great new steward, just as GE has been, and they deserve the chance to implement their own vision.” That vision – in the hands of Burke – might not be to the liking of MSNBC’s stable of talent. Burke has deep ties to the Republican Party. According to Public Citizen , Burke raised at least $200,000 for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign. Prior to that, he served on the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology under Bush, at a time when the administration was undermining scientific consensus on topics including climate change, stem-cell research, and even the relationship between corn syrup and rates of diabetes in children. As a top science adviser to President Bush, did Burke condone administration efforts to bury scientific findings that challenged official policy? What would he do when comments or reporting by Olbermann or Maddow challenge Comcast’s corporate dogma? Peter A. Chernin, Former Second in Command at News Corp. Peter Chernin was a major fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Clinton, according to the New York Times , which also reports that he may be on the short list to take over NBC operations should Comcast get the nod. For years, Chernin has co-owned a restaurant on Martha’s Vinyard with Comcast Chief Executive Brian Roberts. More recently, he was tapped by Roberts to become a “special adviser” to Comcast on the potential merger. Chernin’s close ties to Clinton, Roberts and Rupert Murdoch indicate his biases may be more corporate than political. But it was during his tenure at Fox that the network looked the other way as many of its personalities actively — and financially — supported Republican candidates and Tea Party causes. Chernin once asked Roberts whether he planned to interfere in editorial content at MSNBC — a question that Roberts refused to answer. Eileen Dolente, Senior Director, Comcast Multimedia Content Development Odds are slim that Eileen Dolente would be picked to head MSNBC programming. But her record at Comcast offers a disturbing glimpse into the cable company’s mindset regarding speech that interferes with business as usual. As director of programming for Comcast’s news division, CN8, Dolente fired host Barry Nolan. His crime? Nolan had protested a major award being given to Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly. Nolan was “appalled” that an award would be given to O’Reilly. He dashed off e-mails stating that O’Reilly’s “indiscretions, inaccuracies, and prejudices disqualify him for such a lofty honor.” Dolente was appalled that one of her hosts would share such an opinion, and within a week of the award ceremony, she showed Nolan the door. Documents filed in a subsequent lawsuit revealed that the mutual business interests of Comcast and News Corp., which employs O’Reilly, were a major factor in Nolan’s firing. What position would Comcast take should MSNBC personalities launch a similar attack on a valued business partner? If Dolente takes the helm, past may become prologue for MSNBC.

Read the full article →

Daniel T. Walsh: Harness the Profit Motive to Deliver Environmental Sustainability

November 5, 2010

Showing businesses how to profitably achieve environmental sustainability goals just might be the motivational carrot we need to begin reducing energy consumption today and jumpstart significant progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. While it appears increasingly unlikely that Congress will take up energy or climate legislation during the current session, there is a growing consensus among business leaders that meaningful progress can be made in mitigating emissions and energy use by embracing new tools and approaches into their business models. Debunking the notion that sustainability and profitability are mutually exclusive corporate goals, a recent CEO survey on sustainability released by Accenture, found that sustainability is being recognized as a source of cost efficiencies and revenue growth. In fact, 80 percent of the more than 760 CEOs surveyed indicated that the downturn has only served to raise the importance of sustainability for their businesses. What’s driving this dramatic shift in behavior is the growing realization that achieving energy efficiency is not only good for the environment and reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, but can deliver financial returns that can far outweigh the initial investment and can readily be turned into an opportunity for savings that can boost bottom lines. To realize a more sustainable energy future, it is necessary to change how we produce and consume fossil fuels. Changing production is a slow route that is principally limited to progress in the energy sector. Reducing consumption, however, can happen faster and have a far greater impact across the entire economy. And that’s particularly true if it’s based on simple, traditional economic theory that dictates that the best way to encourage consumer behavior is to change the equation — by removing the effort, or cost of taking positive action and delivering immediate gratification or savings. For example, the overwhelming response to some of the government’s recent tax rebate programs showed just how powerful immediate cost savings can be as a motivator in achieving positive environmental outcomes. For example consumer response to instant vehicle rebates overwhelmed original projections, with 677,000 older vehicles being swapped for more efficient models in a matter of weeks, resulting in an impressive annual reduction of 1.5 million metric tons of CO2. For U.S. businesses, one of the fastest routes to emissions reduction and energy savings is being achieved through the deployment and use of “smart networks.” Smart networks leverage a powerful “network offset effect” that occurs when replacing carbon-intensive activities – such as travel – with less carbon intensive technologies. The simple fact is that the energy required to communicate is much less than the energy required to physically move people and things around. By using technology to leapfrog the old, physical infrastructure we can move work to people rather than people to work; connect rather than travel; manage business remotely and in real-time; and improve transportation and distribution system efficiencies Demonstrating how travel replacement can reduce costs targets some of the lowest hanging fruit for reducing energy consumption in the U.S. Telepresence and other forms of virtual collaboration that can replace some business travel represent perhaps the most promising opportunity for businesses to start capturing significant emissions reduction benefits in the near-term, with relatively minor changes to existing business processes – i.e., removing the “effort” in the cost equation. Telepresesence, a high-definition videoconferencing technology which enables groups of people to meet “in person” in multiple locations worldwide – holds even greater promise for unlocking the sustainability benefits of travel replacement. A recently released study commissioned by the Carbon Disclosure Project and produced by independent analyst firm, Verdantix, found that if the largest US and UK businesses (> $1 billion revenues) were to substitute telepresence for some business travel, they could cut CO2 emissions by nearly 5.5 million metric tons by 2020- equivalent to removing more than one million passenger vehicles from the road for one year. And with the systems achieving payback in only 15 months, the study found that total economy-wide financial benefits of almost $19 billion could be achieved in the same timeframe. The study also revealed that telepresence technology can help speed decision-making, improve employee productivity, and provide workers with a better work-life balance – delivering a host of immediate benefits above and beyond cost savings to motivate positive behavior in reducing emissions. Harnessing smart networks that leverage the network offset effect to deliver immediate energy efficiencies and cost savings to businesses just might be the right economic equation to motivate the positive behaviors and actions required to deliver significant progress in addressing energy efficiency and emissions reduction. And it’s an approach that can help businesses make smarter sustainability choices and investments today that better prepare them for whatever challenges may lie ahead. Daniel T. Walsh is a Senior Vice President in Marketing Services for AT&T Business Solutions.

Read the full article →

Daniel T. Walsh: Harness the Profit Motive to Deliver Environmental Sustainability

November 5, 2010

Showing businesses how to profitably achieve environmental sustainability goals just might be the motivational carrot we need to begin reducing energy consumption today and jumpstart significant progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. While it appears increasingly unlikely that Congress will take up energy or climate legislation during the current session, there is a growing consensus among business leaders that meaningful progress can be made in mitigating emissions and energy use by embracing new tools and approaches into their business models. Debunking the notion that sustainability and profitability are mutually exclusive corporate goals, a recent CEO survey on sustainability released by Accenture, found that sustainability is being recognized as a source of cost efficiencies and revenue growth. In fact, 80 percent of the more than 760 CEOs surveyed indicated that the downturn has only served to raise the importance of sustainability for their businesses. What’s driving this dramatic shift in behavior is the growing realization that achieving energy efficiency is not only good for the environment and reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, but can deliver financial returns that can far outweigh the initial investment and can readily be turned into an opportunity for savings that can boost bottom lines. To realize a more sustainable energy future, it is necessary to change how we produce and consume fossil fuels. Changing production is a slow route that is principally limited to progress in the energy sector. Reducing consumption, however, can happen faster and have a far greater impact across the entire economy. And that’s particularly true if it’s based on simple, traditional economic theory that dictates that the best way to encourage consumer behavior is to change the equation — by removing the effort, or cost of taking positive action and delivering immediate gratification or savings. For example, the overwhelming response to some of the government’s recent tax rebate programs showed just how powerful immediate cost savings can be as a motivator in achieving positive environmental outcomes. For example consumer response to instant vehicle rebates overwhelmed original projections, with 677,000 older vehicles being swapped for more efficient models in a matter of weeks, resulting in an impressive annual reduction of 1.5 million metric tons of CO2. For U.S. businesses, one of the fastest routes to emissions reduction and energy savings is being achieved through the deployment and use of “smart networks.” Smart networks leverage a powerful “network offset effect” that occurs when replacing carbon-intensive activities – such as travel – with less carbon intensive technologies. The simple fact is that the energy required to communicate is much less than the energy required to physically move people and things around. By using technology to leapfrog the old, physical infrastructure we can move work to people rather than people to work; connect rather than travel; manage business remotely and in real-time; and improve transportation and distribution system efficiencies Demonstrating how travel replacement can reduce costs targets some of the lowest hanging fruit for reducing energy consumption in the U.S. Telepresence and other forms of virtual collaboration that can replace some business travel represent perhaps the most promising opportunity for businesses to start capturing significant emissions reduction benefits in the near-term, with relatively minor changes to existing business processes – i.e., removing the “effort” in the cost equation. Telepresesence, a high-definition videoconferencing technology which enables groups of people to meet “in person” in multiple locations worldwide – holds even greater promise for unlocking the sustainability benefits of travel replacement. A recently released study commissioned by the Carbon Disclosure Project and produced by independent analyst firm, Verdantix, found that if the largest US and UK businesses (> $1 billion revenues) were to substitute telepresence for some business travel, they could cut CO2 emissions by nearly 5.5 million metric tons by 2020- equivalent to removing more than one million passenger vehicles from the road for one year. And with the systems achieving payback in only 15 months, the study found that total economy-wide financial benefits of almost $19 billion could be achieved in the same timeframe. The study also revealed that telepresence technology can help speed decision-making, improve employee productivity, and provide workers with a better work-life balance – delivering a host of immediate benefits above and beyond cost savings to motivate positive behavior in reducing emissions. Harnessing smart networks that leverage the network offset effect to deliver immediate energy efficiencies and cost savings to businesses just might be the right economic equation to motivate the positive behaviors and actions required to deliver significant progress in addressing energy efficiency and emissions reduction. And it’s an approach that can help businesses make smarter sustainability choices and investments today that better prepare them for whatever challenges may lie ahead. Daniel T. Walsh is a Senior Vice President in Marketing Services for AT&T Business Solutions.

Read the full article →

SolarWinds Expands Leadership Team With Two Key Hires — Senior Vice President of Product Strategy and Vice President of Asia-Pacific Sales

October 28, 2010

Suku Krishnaraj’s Leadership Expected to Guide and Accelerate SolarWinds Portfolio of Network, Application and Storage Management Solutions; Gary Angel to Lead Sales Organization in Asia-Pacific Region

Read the full article →

Video: Silva Says Deutsche Bank’s Writedown `A Small Hiccup’

October 27, 2010

Oct. 27 (Bloomberg) — Ralph Silva of Silva Research Network talks about Deutsche Bank AG’s third-quarter loss. Germany’s biggest bank reported the loss after writing down the value of its holding in Deutsche Postbank AG. Silva speks with Mark Barton on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Narus Appoints Rod Murchison Senior Vice President of Product Management

October 26, 2010

Veteran Executive Brings More Than 20 Years’ Innovation in Addressing Complex Network and Security Needs

Read the full article →

Mark Pasetsky: Corporate Execs Beware! Social Media Can Destroy Your Executive Brand!

October 19, 2010

With the recent success of the film, The Social Network , it’s more important than ever for executives to understand the potentially negative consequences of social media networks. For many, a random social media comment or photo can destroy your executive brand, which is how how you are perceived by your colleagues and those in your industry. Whether you’re updating your status on Facebook, sharing your latest thoughts on Twitter, or checking in at a location on Foursquare, every action can impact your executive brand. Why Worry? Corporations are becoming savvier everyday at checking their employees actions on these networks, and employees who are not representing their company in a positive manner could face an uncertain future. It’s also extremely important for executives seeking new opportunities to be careful about their social networking activities as recruiters are going beyond a Google search to check their candidates backgrounds. In fact, a thorough review of a potential new employee’s Facebook page is becoming the norm, not the exception. Top Three Things to Remember Before Posting on a Social Network 1) Your Boss is Watching! My advice to clients is to always remember that what you’re posting can and most likely will be reviewed by your superiors. If for any reason you feel like bragging about your late night party or moaning about your volatile break-up, it’s probably best to make that a verbal conversation. 2) Don’t Disparage Your Company If you’re having a tough day at work or just had a disagreement with your boss, don’t post that on Facebook! That not only makes you look bad but your company will certainly not be pleased. In fact, I would suggest checking with your supervisor before posting anything about your company. 3) Pictures Tell a 1000 Words Yes, it’s a cliche. But in the social media world, it’s more true than ever before. Photos of your wild life is fun to share with friends but not with your employer. With all this being said, social networks offer fantastic ways to stay in touch with friends, build your network and grow your executive brand in a positive way, if you think twice before posting. Mark Pasetsky is the founder of Mark Allen & Company , a corporate communications firm in NY, as well as the editorial director for media and entertainment site CoverAwards.

Read the full article →

Chevron Gets Pranked With A "We Agree" Fake Ad Campaign

October 18, 2010

Chevron is scrambling to deal with an elaborate lampoon of a major advertising campaign that the company introduced on Monday. An environmental organization, the Rainforest Action Network, sent an e-mail on Monday afternoon claiming credit for the spoof, along with Amazon Watch and the Yes Men.

Read the full article →

New Century Hospice Closes $20M Series A Financing Led by Scale Venture Partners and Petra Capital Partners

October 13, 2010

New Capital to Support Regional Expansion of Network of Hospice Care Centers

Read the full article →

Video: Smith Says Average Facebook Share Trade Is $2 Million: Video

October 11, 2010

Oct. 11 (Bloomberg) — Jeremy Smith, chief strategy officer at SecondMarket Inc., talks about private sales of Facebook Inc. and Zynga Game Network Inc. shares. Smith also discusses the companies’ imposition of fees of at least $2,500 for each sale of their shares. He talks with Carol Massar and Matt Miller on Bloomberg Television’s “Street Smart.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Donald Trump Says He’s Seriously Considering Running For President

October 5, 2010

Real estate mogul Donald Trump said on Tuesday’s edition of “Morning Joe” on MSNBC that he’s “absolutely thinking about” making a bid for the White House in 2012. The same day, Trump told Fox News that if he were to mount a presidential campaign he’d run as a Republican. “I’m totally being serious because I can’t stand what’s happening to the country,” said the New York-based businessman to the network. “I am being serious about it. I’ve been asked for years to do it. And I had no interest. This is the first time I am — at least I’m considering it.” Trump stressed that while he’s thinking about running for president, it’s premature to say whether or not he’ll bite the bullet in the end. CNN reported earlier this week: Trump is making clear he had nothing to do with a mysterious poll in New Hampshire that, accordant to TIME Magazine, asked Granite State voters about a potential Trump presidential bid. “I never heard of this poll but I’m anxious to find out what it says. I do not know about a poll taken in New Hampshire,” Trump said Monday on CNN’s “American Morning.” Trump reiterated to Fox News that he played no role in generating the study; however, he did call the results it produced “amazing.” He signaled he thinks he may just be the right person to takeover the White House, saying, “I think my whole life has sort of been about finesse when you get right down to it.” WATCH: Donald Trumps Talks 2012 On MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’

Read the full article →

Mike Green: Innovation Crisis in Black America Pt. 4: 20th vs 21st century ideology

October 5, 2010

When unemployment in Black America topped 16 percent and Black teen unemployment skyrocketed to an outrageous 45 percent this summer, the voices of outrage were muffled in the pockets of a few media that cared to cover the crisis. The majority of media wrung their collective hands over 9 and 10 percent unemployment challenges in White America, with overall teen unemployment hovering at 23 percent. Dirty Secret “A dirty little secret is that many jobs are not going to come back,” says Johnathan Holifield, founder of Trim Tab System, LLC, a personal development and organizational leadership methodology, which applies innovation concepts and tools to generate exponential impact. “Under the old model, recovery meant increased productivity, which meant increased hiring, Holifield said. “That is no longer the case. Because of the ingenious uses and applications and adoptions of new technology throughout our economy, we will continue to experience productivity growth but we will not have the level of job replacement and hiring that our recoveries in the past have been accustomed to.” Dear President Obama … Dr. Boyce Watkins, founder of Your Black World , underscores Holifield’s point. He wrote a public letter to President Barack Obama that stated in part: “In addition to massive unemployment, wealth inequality in America remains a persistent problem, causing African Americans to bear the brunt of this economic crisis in ways that are unimaginable to other Americans. Our homes are facing foreclosure more often and we are less able to rely on a source of background wealth to help us get through the toughest times. “Yet, while we are the least prepared for the recession, we are being hit with a downturn that is twice as forceful as that being experienced by the rest of America. In fact, even after the recession is over, our unemployment rate will probably be as high or higher than the rate that white Americans are agonizing over right now. The United Nations has investigated this issue as a human rights violation, because it appears that we live in a nation that accepts a black underclass as a default way of life. “To this point, your administration has remained disturbingly silent on the issue of black unemployment. The silence is deafening, but the economic hardship is loud and clear. I am concerned that many of your key economic advisers are unable or unwilling to process and empathize with the depths of black economic misery in America.” Never-Ending Recession Dr. Watkins called on President Obama to institute political efforts and policy measures that would help create urban jobs through congressional legislation and generate more government contracts with African American companies. At theLoop21.org , Dr. Watkins made a compelling case that suggests even when the economy recovers, the burden of unemployment for Black America will still be in double digits while the nation celebrates a long-awaited return to prosperity. He states: “Our country spent 400 years firmly placing black folks at the bottom of the social totem poll, only allowing us to recently participate as laborers in the American economic system. “The conclusion is that even during good economic times, it is acceptable in the eyes of the Obama Administration for black unemployment to be worse than it is for whites during a recession. The recession will never end for us.” I Have A Nightmare! In an effort to address the dire situation facing Black America, The Nation magazine took a look back at Dr. Martin Luther King’s words when he spoke on the issue of joblessness five years after his famous rallying cry, “I have a Dream.” The Nation writes: “In King’s vision of the campaign, thousands of Americans who had been abandoned by the economy would create a tent city on the National Mall, demand action from Congress, and engage in nonviolent civil disobedience until their voices were heard. King argued in one of his last sermons, ‘If a man doesn’t have a job or an income, he has neither life nor liberty nor the possibility for the pursuit of happiness. He merely exists.’ “Four decades later, as our country struggles with disappearing jobs and growing desperation, much of the critique of the U.S. economy offered in the Poor People’s Campaign is newly resonant. “In a November 1956 sermon, King presented an imaginary letter from the apostle Paul to American Christians, which stated, ‘Oh America, how often have you taken necessities from the masses to give luxuries to the classes… God never intended for one group of people to live in superfluous inordinate wealth, while others live in abject deadening poverty.’ “Unfortunately, since then, inequality has only grown.” 42 Years of Economic Stagnation Both Dr. King and Dr. Watkins note the same problem of unemployment and economic disparity persists for Black America. It is a stark reality that one leader spoke obvious truth in the mid-20th century while another continues the same truthful refrain today in the 21st. There is one other similarity. Dr. King called for a government solution. Dr. Watkins is calling for the same. Yet, the 535 members of Congress are no more moved to resolving the crisis today than the congressional members were in 1968 … and every year in between. MLK and Jeremiah Wright: On The Same Page Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, the author of a new book , ” April 4, 1968: Dr. Martin Luther King’s Death and How It Changed America ,” provided a unique look at how Dr. King’s message evolved beyond 1963 until his assassination in 1968, when he was preparing to give an upcoming sermon entitled, ” Why America May Go To Hell .” Voices like Dr. Watkins, Dr. Dyson and others today are necessary. And the pressure upon congress must continue to be applied from quarters outside of the infamous K Street, where a lobbyist cabal routinely spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year on behalf of their clients to ensure congressional members hear and prioritize their problems. Economic Katrina History strongly advises that government will drag its feet until another Black generation has passed on lint-filled pockets to destitute grandchildren. Even a Black president cannot move 535 leaders sitting on their hands and ignoring the plight of Americans hit hardest by the economic crisis. For example, the National Association of Small Business Investment Companies sent its representative, Carolyn Galiette, to testify before Congress on Oct. 14, 2009. She spoke of the work the SBIC was doing to bridge the funding gap for women and minority businesses, but also warned of the seriousness of the problem that threatened to push investment companies, such as hers, out of the effort: “Our partnership with the SBA has enabled our portfolio companies to create approximately 4,500 jobs and to increase revenues in these companies by over 50% on average. Moreover, we have accomplished all of this while making 50% of our investments in companies owned and managed by women and minorities and businesses located in or employing residents of low and moderate income communities. “We have provided capital where larger, more established financing sources would not, some of which are the very lenders and investors who recently received TARP financing. Despite the success of the SBIC program and of Ironwood Capital, if the program is not reformed we and many other funds that are bona fide experts in growing domestic small businesses will be forced to leave the program. “… despite the efficiency of the SBIC credit facility, the program is dramatically underused. Fiscal year 2009 used only about 20% of the SBA’s $3 billion in capacity, denying domestic small businesses over $2 billion in SBA leverage and $1 billion in private growth capital. “Today more than ever, the patient capital, market experience, and governance guidance that SBICs provide fill a capital chasm that threatens the ability of small businesses to emerge from the current recession. Congressional action is needed from you to realize improvements that are critical to providing capital to small business.” Galiette’s plea highlighted the slothful, lazy and ambivalent processes employed by Congress. Government may support an outside solution, but government will not initiate nor embody a solution to the unemployment crisis in America; that’s the job of innovative entrepreneurs and investors. DIYS: Do It Yourself Innovative Solutions Innocentive is one such effort by innovative leaders who decided to take on the challenge of job creation by investing in deserving entrepreneurs. Innocentive claims it “harnesses collective brain power around the world to solve problems that really matter.” Innocentive brings together “seekers” (those with problems) with “solvers” (those with the means to address problems). So, how’s it going for this 9-year-old organization? Here are some quick facts from the Innocentive website : Total Solvers: 200,000+ from 200 countries Total Challenges Posted: 1044 Project Rooms Opened to Date: 294,865 Total Solution Submissions: 19,346 Total Awards Given: 685 Total Award Dollars Posted:24.2 million Range of awards:5,000 to1 million based on the complexity of the problem Total Dollars Awarded:5.3 million Average Success Rate: 50% Developing Innovative Infrastructure in Black America Where is the Innocentive of Black America? If a single organization can bring together more than 200,000 collaborators to invest in economic solutions through the efforts of innovative entrepreneurs, what could be Black America achieve by bringing together business, education and policy leaders, teachers and community organizations, entrepreneurs and investors? What amount of productivity could Black America contribute to the Age of Innovation if a concerted effort was made to focus on creating an innovation infrastructure through which students were taught and motivated, entrepreneurs were mentored and supported, and investors were attracted by the development of high-growth companies? Organizations like the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor ( GEM ) produce data that show conclusively innovative high-growth entrepreneurial ventures are the driving forces behind significant job creation. Call for Innovative Entrepreneurs The well-respected Conference Board offers data in its report, ” Entrepreneurs, Inventors and the Growth of the Economy ,” which underscores the need for innovative entrepreneurship. The Conference Board report, written by William J. Baumol of New York University and Princeton University in January 2008, points out there is a difference between an entrepreneur who opens a local store, barber shop or community restaurant, and a visionary risk-taker who develops a high-growth innovation that improves upon an existing idea or introduces new technology and captures a share of the market: “Generally, entrepreneurs have been defined as individuals who create a new firm or some other economic organization or who launch some economic activity that they will carry out at least initially. A replicative entrepreneur is someone who organizes an enterprise of a variety that has been launched many times before, and of which many other examples are currently extant–e.g., a new retail shoe shop or another limousine service. Replicative entrepreneurship has proven its effectiveness as a way out of poverty, as dramatically illustrated by the immigrant peddlers who often ended up sending their children to college. “The innovative entrepreneur, as the name implies, does something that has not been done before. She may market a new product, or may sell licenses to other firms to make use of intellectual property in her possession, the specifications of new products, or new production processes. But she may innovate in other ways as well, for example, recognizing new uses for an old product or a new market for that item, or a novel and more efficient way to organize the firm. “Indeed, I will note presently that the options available to the innovative entrepreneur are much broader than that. This is important because it is the innovative entrepreneurs who are the key to economic growth, since it is they, rather than the replicative entrepreneurs, who ensure that invention is put to effective use. Without innovative entrepreneurs, the innovations that promise rapid economic growth have been left to languish. But such an outcome can be prevented only if the prevailing economic forces provide the incentives for the innovative entrepreneurs to carry out the necessary activities.” These innovative entrepreneurs are largely missing in Black America. With failing educational systems, under-represented numbers in the science, technology, engineering and math ( STEM ) fields, severely under-represented numbers in high-growth entrepreneurship and SEC-qualified investors, the crisis of innovation in Black America threatens to undermine progress and productivity well into the 21st century. Steps Toward Producing Black Innovators But there are efforts being made to address the problem: Today, the Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship ( NTFE ) is concluding its $10,000 high school entrepreneurship contest , which included an elevator pitch contest and business plan contest. The contest, sponsored by Oppenheimer Funds and Southwest Airlines, will hold a celebration for its finalists tonight (October 5, 2010) and they will ring the opening bell at the stock market tomorrow. On the professional level, Unity, Journalists of Color association is a strategic alliance of four journalists associations representing the spectrum of Black, Hispanic, Asian and Native American journalists. Unity coordinated a new program funded by the Ford Foundation for journalists of color who want to become entrepreneurs called New U. Sixteen participants attended two-day “boot camps” to learn entrepreneurial skills and pitch their ideas to a group of mentors and industry experts. Unity is currently hosting a 30-second pitch contest online for its journalists-turned-entrepreneurs who participated in the New U entrepreneurship mentoring program. As one of the New U mentors, I was thrilled to participate in a developing infrastructure for journalists to help transition their professional talents and networking skills and into the world of entrepreneurship. “This is a ‘solutions-based’ project,” said Doug Mitchell, program co-director. “There is much to know and there are many people we’ve discovered who are eager to help from all corners to close the gap between who gets funded and who does not.” Change the Equation is an education effort focused on channeling students into the STEM fields of learning: science, technology, engineering and math. Johnathan Holifield, Founder Trim Tab System, Inc. I interviewed Johnathan Holifield to get his perspective on the pathway from 20th century processes to 21st century innovation. Holifield offers a visionary pathway that leads Black America from the dark portrait of the 20th century painted by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and highlighted by Dr. Boyce Watkins into a new frontier of 21st century opportunity. Prior to establishing the Trim Tab System, Holifield served as: President/CEO of the Urban League of Greater Cleveland President of the Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy Executive Vice President of Council for World-Class Communities in Benton Harbor, Michigan Vice President of New Economy Enterprise for the Cincinnati USA Chamber of Commerce Founding Executive Director of CincyTech Additionally, Holifield practiced civil litigation with the Manley, Burke & Lipton firm and the Hamilton County, Ohio Prosecuting Attorney’s Office and was a member of the National Football League’s Cincinnati Bengals. Q: What is the key to helping Black Americans become more productive in the arenas of innovative entrepreneurship? A: Imagination is the mother of innovation. I remember I was over someone’s house and the mother told the kids, “Go outside and play.” And the kids said, “Play what?” Have we become so reliant on being entertained, structured play, that we no longer have the kind of imagination that ultimately feeds innovation? The imagination equation is: education, which includes but is not exclusive to academic training, plus unstructured play. Q: What is the core challenge for Black America to achieve progress and attract investments? A: We don’t talk about innovation as a life skill. We’re not nearly well-represented in the science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) disciplines that feed a lot of the explosive growth companies either through the production or application of new technology. Increase the demand for angel investment groups. That’s the core challenge. Q: CB Insights issued a report this summer that revealed Black American entrepreneurs received just 1% of angel and VC funding through the first half of 2010, while Asian American entrepreneurs received 12% and Whites 87%. A: It’s interesting to me that the report identified Asian entrepreneurs at a 12 percent level of receiving VC funding during that period, which I have no doubt is disproportionately high compared to their numbers in the population. What’s also disproportionately high among Asian students is high achievement in math, science, engineering; the STEM programs. And if you extrapolate that out to what gets funded, its high and explosive growth companies in the innovation economy. Most of those companies are using, or producing, technology that’s grounded in science, mathematics and engineering. That’s what it looks like. And I think our challenge, in order to increase the numbers of African American, Black entrepreneurs, high-growth or explosive growth entrepreneurs, we have to increase the numbers of African Americans who are immersed in the STEM disciplines. Q: What’s the answer to the lack of funding information and access? A: For the funding model, these entrepreneurs will need access to leadership and management talent, ultimately to attract the kind of growth capital they need, plus clusters of what I call “peer networks” and a robust infrastructure around them of service providers and institutional support. That’s how states like Ohio, for example, are growing the innovation economy. We (African Americans) have very little interaction with those networks from my experience. And in our community of support services to help African Americans achieve a level of equitable contribution to the national economy, none of these things are present. Q: Business plans are a big part of attracting funding, either from institutional investors like angels and venture capitalists or nonprofit resources and potential clients. What’s your recommendation on writing a business plan? A: Business plans should be focused on cash flow and growth. Not growth for the sake of growth and not mindless growth but growth consistent with the business plan along with outstanding management talent focused on explosive growth. Q: Education leaders in Black America are concerned about the low levels of Blacks in the STEM fields, which produce the highest number of explosive growth companies. To add to the challenge, there are growing numbers of universities that have separate entrepreneurship centers, like Harvard, Stanford, UC Berkeley and others that recognize the need to nurture the entrepreneurial energy that propels innovation. Where is Black America in this fast-paced push for productivity? A: In the education field, particularly higher education, it has been a continuing struggle to evolve the American higher education model. It is exceedingly difficult for universities that are largely not-entrepreneurial to build, not just an entrepreneurial center, but exude a culture of entrepreneurship throughout the university, throughout the faculty, staff and student body. It’s one thing to have an isolated entrepreneurship center within a university and another thing to have an entrepreneurial university that in many cases manifests breakthrough ideas through the entrepreneurship center ultimately for commercialization in the marketplace. I think there’s still a disconnect between the old model institution and the 21st century needs of all of our national assets. * * * Johnathan Holifield is inviting a collaboration of leaders to join him and Dr. Chad Womack of tbed21.org in developing an innovation infrastructure for Black America. To join the growing number of collaborators, contact Johnathan Holifield via email: johnathan@trimtabsystem.com. (Ask about the Trim Tab) Read the entire four-part series: Pt 1: Innovation Crisis in Black America Pt 2: Where are Black Entrepreneurs and Angels? Pt 3: The Challenges of Tech Entrepreneurship

Read the full article →

Feds Sue Fox News Over Catherine Herridge’s Charges Of Discrimination, Retaliation

October 1, 2010

WASHINGTON — Federal authorities are suing the Fox News Network for allegedly retaliating against a reporter after she complained about unequal pay and job conditions based on her gender and age. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says Fox News Channel reporter Catherine Herridge filed an internal complaint about allegedly discriminatory practices in 2007. Fox found no evidence of bias, but the EEOC says the network later included language in Herridge’s employment contract intended to stop her from making any more complaints. Herridge refused to sign the contract. The network agreed to remove the language after she complained to the EEOC. The EEOC seeks unspecified monetary damages and a court order enjoining Fox from retaliating against other employees.

Read the full article →

Video: Silva Says Lack of HSBC Succession Plan `Great Surprise’

September 24, 2010

Sept. 24 (Bloomberg) — Ralph Silva of Silva Research Network talks about the outlook for regulatory changes in the U.K. banking industry and the leadership shakeup at HSBC Holdings Plc. HSBC Chairman Stephen Green’s Sept. 7 decision to resign and become trade minister was followed this week by the departure of Chief Executive Officer Michael Geoghegan. Silva speaks with Linzie Janis on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Vycor Medical Continues to Build Its Sales and Marketing Infrastructure for Its ViewSite(TM) Neurosurgery Retraction Devices

September 21, 2010

Vycor Medical Appoints a National Sales Director and New Distributors for Its ViewSite Brain Access Systems in the US and Internationally — Now Part of the Company’s Global Distribution Network That Encompasses the US, Canada, the Benelux, Spain, Italy, Greece, Scandinavia, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea

Read the full article →

Angela Haines: Spotters for Starter Uppers: Helping CEO’s Make the Pitch

September 20, 2010

On one of the last sweltering days of summer in New York, a group of 21 eager entrepreneurs gathered for an all day boot camp on how to position their fledgling companies to attract investors. For nearly four hours in the morning, they listened intently to impressive panels of experts, talking on “The Key Elements of a Venture Presentation” followed by “Presenting Financials and The Business Models.” Among the panelists were representatives from such companies as Covington & Burling, AOL Ventures, Golden Seeds, Cava Capital, Microsoft, Intel Capital, Grant Thornton and NBC Universal. This boot camp, ALL THINGS MEDIA, focused on women entrepreneurs in all sectors of the media, is the 21st annual ritual for Springboard Enterprises , a nonprofit group whose mission is to educate, coach, and showcase women-led high growth companies seeking equity capital for expansion. Each forum targets a specific business sector; past ones have highlighted life science and technology companies. Executive director Amy Millman describes their training program as “the best sounding board and support organization for women entrepreneurs who need a network of trusted resources to scale their companies.” And the results speak to the value of these forums. Out of the 4,000 businesses Springboard has screened in the past decade, it has selected and presented 426 of them to venture capitalists, 83% of which have received funding for a total of $5 billion in equity, grants and strategic investments. To date, seven of its companies have gone public and about a quarter of them have merged or been acquired. To date, 80% of the companies continue to operate; on average each company has 30 employees and reports $12 mil in annual revenues. The 21 entrepreneurs from all over the US at the New York boot camp were the happy survivors of screening sessions earlier this summer. Each year Springboard spends about two months putting together its screening committees, another two months recruiting women-led businesses, one month for initial screening leading to the intensive boot camp for the selected enterprises which is followed by more coaching, culminating in a fall event for potential investors. After a brief, organic lunch, the boot campers, with a renewed sense of mission, were ready to strut their stuff. With a rousing send off on tips to make their presentations pop, by pitch specialist Sam Horn of Sam Horn Keynotes , the women were allowed only two minutes to introduce their companies to the assembled audience. Their presentations underwent immediate scrutiny by two business veterans: Kay Koplovitz, Chairman of the Board for Springboard Enterprises and founder of USA Network, the first woman network president in television history, and Lauren Flanagan, co founder of Phenomenelle Angels Fund, and a CEO of SCIO Corp, a strategic advisory firm for tech-based businesses. Their responses, along with some from the audience, focused on both delivery and content: “Don’t talk so quietly; you’re a firehose!” “Give us a sense of how big your market is?” “What happened to your management team?” to which the entrepreneur sheepishly admitted, “I forgot them.” How did the entrepreneurs react? Laurie Cohn, whose company ChatThreads is an analytics company that helps brands measure consumer reaction, says she learned to do a better job of connecting with her audience. “My elevator pitch,” she says, “changed from a vague statement that ChatThreads tracks how, when and where consumers encounter brand touchpoints on a day-to-day basis, and how these encounters impact purchase behavior to a friendlier ‘think about your favorite soda, coffee or hummus’–more customer oriented.” Kelly Fitzsimmons, CEO of HarQen, a web telephony company that captures, organizes and distributes original voice through a voice management platform, has already successfully raised venture capital but she came for further training because “every raise is different, as is every audience; I need to talk in more depth about our competition and how we distinguish ourselves.” Her resolution this time is “to become more engaged with my classmates to extend my network and my horizons.” Another entrepreneur, Paula Jagemann, CEO of Something With , an e-commerce catalog that offers patients of breast cancer and other diseases, a one stop shopping online store to purchase necessary products recommended by doctors for use during and post treatment, says that the experience reminded her of the value of spotters. For professional gymnasts spotters are always there whenever they mount, dismount or execute a difficult move. “Springboard,” she observes, “is the spotter for new entrepreneurs or for those like me who are returning to the entrepreneurship world and need advice and support.” What’s next for the trainees? Each company will be matched with 3-5 coaches who over the next several weeks will assist them in developing and refining their investor presentations to ten minutes. Each company posts slides and pertinent documents on a secure online site so that coaches can easily comment and suggest revisions. Final performance for their polished pitches? On October 20th the 21 newly trained recruits reunite in New York at the Paley Center for the Media, at a venture capital forum which will showcase these investment–ready, high-growth media companies, led by women, before an audience of about 75 potential investors–angels, VCs, and business development executives from the major media companies including CBS, NBC, Disney, Google and Comcast. Will the next YouTube please step forward!

Read the full article →

IBM, Netezza Deal To Be Made For $1.7 Billion

September 20, 2010

NEW YORK — IBM Corp. said Monday it has agreed to pay $1.7 billion for Netezza Corp., a company that helps businesses sort through data on corporate servers. The deal would help IBM expand in an area known as “analytics,” where the company sees a major source of growth over the next few years. IBM expects to grow annual revenue from analytics services, software and hardware sales to $16 billion by 2015, up from $9 billion last year. It estimates the total annual market now amounts to roughly $100 billion. IBM has been pushing into the analytics business through acquisitions. The company says it has spent $12 billion on 23 separate analytics companies over the past four years. Its biggest takeover in 2009 was a $1.2 billion deal for SPSS Inc., a company that makes analytics software for predicting future trends. Netezza’s software and hardware systems are designed to help companies use data about their businesses to make strategic decisions. The British TV, Internet and phone service provider Virgin Media Inc. uses the technology to quickly assess how price changes or tariffs are affecting sales. Netezza, which is based in Marlborough, Mass., with about 500 employees, also lists Neiman Marcus, Time Warner Inc. and NYSE Euronext Inc. among its customers. IBM is offering $27 per share for Netezza, a 10 percent premium over Friday’s closing share price of $24.60. Netezza shares rose $3.67 from Friday to trade at $28.27, above the offering price. That could signal that investors are expecting a competing bid. IBM shares rose $1.60, or 1.2 percent, to $131.79. Big tech manufacturers have been snapping up smaller companies as they compete with one another to broaden the types of products and services they offer corporate clients. Earlier this month computer maker Hewlett-Packard Co. topped Dell Inc. in a bidding war for data storage company 3Par Inc., eventually paying $2.07 billion. Then last week, HP said it would also buy the network security company ArcSight Inc. for $1.5 billion, branching into an industry where IBM has also made acquisitions over the past few years.

Read the full article →

Art Brodsky: Purists and Zealots for Internet Freedom

September 10, 2010

To hear some big-time business columnists tell it, fighting for freedom is a bad thing. The usually sensible Steve Pearlstein at the Washington Post notes that, “net neutrality zealots” (also known as “ayatollahs of net neutrality”) worked themselves into a “self-righteous lather” over the Verizon-Google compromise on Net Neutrality, caring more about “principles” than the “real world.” For Joe Nocera over at the New York Times , the Verizon-Google deal was a “well-meaning proposal,” that is being set upon by ” fierce, unyielding proponents ” of an open Internet, a group that includes Public Knowledge as part of the “net neutrality purists.” These two columns by respected writers point to an unfortunate tendency among reporters who peer down from Olympian heights onto the world of mortals to bless a compromise as a way to settle a dispute, regardless whether the compromise is productive. There is the surface “pox on both their houses” approach, although it seems as if in practice the tendency further is distinguished by the pejorative descriptions of liberal or progressive parties, and rarely of conservative or business-oriented opinions or groups. (The progressive blogosphere calls this “Broderism” after Washington Post columnist David Broder, who for decades has preached for the non-existent middle ground.) For example, while calling public interest groups names, rarely are telephone and cable companies called out for spending millions of dollars in an attempt to gain control over what had been the most open and free platform for expression and commerce ever invented. Rarely, if ever, are rules seen as a solution to curbing bad corporate behavior — it’s always rules and regulations are seen as the tools of the radical fringe that wants to curb big businesses’ progress. It’s as if the Gulf disasters, the financial/mortgage meltdown and the contaminated eggs had never happened. Had this tendency been in existence a couple of hundred years ago, we might have seen this from prominent columnists: “The angry words from hotheads throughout the colonies, principally from Massachusetts and Virginia, are an affront to good sense. While some of what they want might be helpful, their attitudes are not. There must be a good middle ground, such as allowing Colonial legislatures to exist and to make rules in some areas, but not in others, which should be left to the Crown. Taxation and defense are properly the duty of the King and of Parliament, to be enforced by the Governor. Other items may be delegated to Colonial assemblies, subject to veto.” Then again, there was the dispute between abolitionists and those who favored the “peculiar institution” that existed 150 years ago. There were some compromises attempted, (See Missouri Compromise, Kansas-Nebraska Act) all of which failed. Would the equivalent of today’s columnists have written: “Somewhere between the rantings of abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison and Henry Ward Beecher, who are peddling the nonsense slavery is evil, and the southern politicians like John C. Calhoun, who cling to the argument of states rights, is this stubborn reality: The southern economy needs to exist, supported by cheap labor. Instead of slavery, one compromise should be widespread adoption of long-term indentured servitude. The slaves of today would be freed, yet their labor would be tied to the land for years, ensuring the continued productivity of the southern economy.” Before all the flaming starts, take note: We are not comparing Net Neutrality to either colonial freedom or to slavery. This is an allegorical analysis of the foolhardiness of the faux evenhandedness and worthless compromise combined with a dose of irrelevant factoid and opinion. In this case, there is the small picture of Net Neutrality and the bigger picture of moving the economy to a broadband basis. Nocera, for example, repeats the Verizon/industry talking point that it’s “unrealistic” that all traffic should be treated the same, particularly in the wireless environment with “bandwidth hogs.” No one has said that telephone and cable companies can’t manage their networks. The issue is whether the company providing the network can favor one company’s content over another’s on the basis of a financial arrangement, i.e., payoff so that one service works better than another on the Internet. It has nothing to do with amount of bandwidth consumed – that’s the network provider’s problem. (And blaming customers for actually using the bandwidth they bought is not smart. It’s AT&T’s fault that it can’t keep up with the iPhone customer base, not the customers, as Nocera argues.) There is one Internet. People access it through a wire or from a wireless connection. Consumption of bandwidth is irrelevant to the discussion whether favoritism should exist. That’s why we “purists” don’t like the Verizon-Google “compromise.” It may be fine for Google, with its Android phones, and for Verizon, with its wireless network, but not for consumers who have one set of rules if connected by a network and another if connected through the air. That’s why we opposed it. The best story on the Verizon-Google deal is this one from AOL Daily Finance, which puts it into perspective. The whole point of the Internet is that customers choose what they want to do online, and companies, which offer services and features, have the opportunity to supply them. It is not a cable system; it is, to use Nocera’s sarcastic term, the “sacred Internet.” It’s sacred because no one has yet the ability to control it as cable operators choose what goes onto their networks. Yes, it’s necessary to prevent a company like Comcast from throttling the bandwidth of BitTorrent users (regardless of the amount of bandwidth they were using or what they were using it for — see Nocera again). They didn’t throttle streaming video, which uses a lot more network capacity. That’s why rules are needed, so that if a company does violate the openness principles, another company or a consumer can bring a complaint and the agency will have the authority to resolve it. There is no peril for a carrier now, or even a threat of one. Consumers don’t have great choice in broadband carriers and the legal status is uncertain. This is not “much ado about very little.” It’s much ado about keeping the Internet as it is based on law, not on corporate good will. That’s why the issue has to be decided in the public interest of everyone, not in the private interest of carriers. In her new book, Internet Architecture and Innovation , Stanford Professor Barbara van Schewick writes, “Leaving the evolution of the network to network providers will significantly reduce the Internet’s value to society.” That’s why the ” Third Way ” proposed by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski makes sense. It would take back FCC jurisdiction over what is a service it should have jurisdiction over, yet without the burdens of all of the other regulation that accompanied the old “common carrier” regimes of the past. (Yes, future FCCs could change that, but that possibility exists any time.) It is a comprehensive solution that not only takes care of the issue of the open Internet, but opens the way for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to have the legal authority it needs to deal with affordable broadband, public safety, cybersecurity and a host of other issues. Yes, there are principles involved, principles that shape the real world and should be enforced in order for the “sacred Internet” based on freedom for consumers and web developers and service innovators to continue to exist. If that makes us “purists” and “zealots” and whatever else, then fine.

Read the full article →

Video: Silva Says Barclays May Quit U.K. Rather Than Split Bank

September 8, 2010

Sept. 8 (Bloomberg) — Ralph Silva of Silva Research Network talks about the possibility of U.K. regulators forcing lenders to separate investment banking and retail operations. He speaks with Maryam Nemazee on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.”

Read the full article →

Liz Ryan: How to Show Volunteer Experience on a Resume

September 2, 2010

Dear Liz, If you’re using a “Human Voice” Resume style in a chronological format, what is the best way to include volunteer work experience? Should it be in a separate section of the resume or integrated by date, and if integrated, what would it look like? Diana Hi Diana! It depends whether the volunteer activities happened alongside a regular job, or filled in their own time slot. If you volunteered when you were between jobs, you could show the volunteer experience this way (and by the way, we’re not going to use the word ‘volunteer’ in our description — you did the work, so who cares how and whether you got paid?): American Red Cross, Clifton, New Jersey Webmaster 2004 I was brought on board to overhaul the organization’s website, specifically to attract volunteers, make it easy for them to sign up to help with programs, and accept donations online. – In the three months following the site relaunch, donations increased threefold (from $40K to $120K) – I wrote a soup-to-nuts webmaster’s guide for use once my assignment was completed, detailing everything from changing pages to best SEO practices – The New Jersey state Red Cross Executive Director remarked “Clifton’s is by far the best Red Cross chapter site I’ve seen, anywhere.” Cheers — Liz p.s. Our new Career Altitude Online courses for September are launching next week! Here’s the lineup of courses: Stop! Don’t Send That Resume (Avoiding the Black Hole) Put a Human Voice in Your Resume Build Your Personal Brand Crafting Compelling Pain Letters Getting Started on LinkedIn Enrolling Your Network in Your Job Search The cost to participate is $129 for one course, $199 for two, $269 for three, $319 for four, etc. Join us! … or write to Jackie@asklizryan.com with questions.

Read the full article →

Video: Silva Says Greek Banks Must Merge to Access More Capital

August 31, 2010

Aug. 31 (Bloomberg) — Ralph Silva of Silva Research Network talks about the outlook for mergers in Greece’s banking industry. He speaks with Maryam Nemazee on Bloomberg Television’s “The Pulse.”

Read the full article →

Zach Carter: CNBC Does Not Understand How Regulation Works

August 30, 2010

A lot of CNBC anchors do not seem to understand how regulation works. In fact, it appears that the network’s hosts don’t really grasp how basic economic competition works. If you’ve tuned into the business channel this summer, chances are you’ve heard its star reporters pushing the ridiculous bank lobbyist mantra that new consumer protections will actually make life harder for consumers. It’s simply not true. Wall Street reforms aimed at credit card billing practices and overdraft fees are already protecting the pocketbooks of ordinary citizens all over the country. Bankers don’t like consumer protections for a reason: they’ve been able to make a lot of money in recent years by gouging consumers and tricking them into paying absurd fees. So financiers have dispatched CEOs and lobbyists to CNBC to make the case that their predatory profits are actually good for consumers. Here’s how the perverse argument goes: If you force banks to stop abusing some of their customers, banks have to make their money by charging higher prices to all of their customers. The argument flies in the face of basic facts about how markets work, but even if it was essentially true, the banker dystopia looks much better for consumers than the past decade’s status quo . Take a look at Maria Bartiromo’s obsequious July 22 interview with BB&T CEO Kelly King (who personally took home over $5 million last year , with the economy in the doldrums). You can also find Wells Fargo CFO Howard Atkins making a similar case on July 21, and megabank lobbyist Steve Bartlett pushing the agenda on July 20 (to CNBC’s credit, the anchors push back a bit against Bartlett late in the interview). From Bartiromo’s King interview: MB: So many people have said the fee business is a profitable and a substantial one for so many banks, whether it’s overdraft fees or any other fees. And if we have rules that they won’t be able to charge that, they’re going to find some other place to put those fees. KK: Well that’s right. You know Maria, we have to cover our costs . . . we simply have to find a way to recover our costs, which ultimately means that there will be increased charges to the consumer. There’s a glaring hole in this argument. Whatever their costs, banks still have to compete with each other on pricing. If new regulations force banks to stop charging deceptive, hidden fees, banks can’t just automatically move those fees elsewhere and expect to score the same profits. They may be able to jack up their prices temporarily, but pretty soon they’ll have to come down as banks try to win over new customers. This is what Credit Suisse analyst Moshe Orenbuch means when he says he expects profits to be ” competed away .” Hidden fees are much more profitable than up-front fees, because the normal market rules of competition don’t apply when customers don’t know they’re being charged. They’ll rack up tremendous fees that they would never intentionally accumulate. When you place those fees up-front in the form of higher interest rates, suddenly people don’t want to pay them anymore, and demand lower rates. This is why banks are complaining about the rules–they wouldn’t care about new consumer protections if they truly had no impact on their profits (and by extension, bonuses). This is basically what has been happening with credit card interest rates since the enactment of new credit card reforms in 2009. Interest rates have been barely effected by the law. That doesn’t mean that the rates aren’t going up– the average credit card interest rate has moved from about 13 percent in June 2009 to about 14.5 percent this summer. If free and fair markets cost 11 percent more than unfair and deceptive markets, count me in for fairness. But even that modest increase is not a function of enhanced consumer protections–it’s a function of record-high default rates on credit cards. Banks are taking huge losses from the recession as consumers fail to pay off their credit card debt. That really does drive prices higher. But it’s a “cost” that has nothing to do with consumer protection. The millionaires on CNBC are primarily worried about overdraft fees, since many of the most egregious credit card abuses were outlawed by Congress in April 2009. The banking industry raked in a monstrous $38.5 billion in overdrafts last year, far in excess of the industry’s total combined profit of just $12 billion. Without overdrafts, many banks would have been taking losses, not profits, and a lot of big bonuses wouldn’t have been paid. Did banks really have $38.5 billion in checking account costs in 2009? Of course not. After all, with costs so high, how ever did banks get by with the paltry $23.7 billion in overdraft income they scored in 2008? What really matters to banks on checking is not cost , but potential profit . That’s why a lot of banks will actually pay interest on checking account balances –the more money you keep in your checking account, the more money banks have to lend out profitably. For the middle class and the wealthy, new overdraft rules aren’t going to affect checking accounts at all, since those accounts aren’t costing banks anything–they’re a profit-generator. This potential profit isn’t quite as compelling for the checking accounts of low-income people, since those accounts by definition do not have much money in them for banks to lend out. But that doesn’t mean that every overdraft trick deployed in 2009 was a necessary charge. Indeed, banks have been devising more and more tricks to rake in overdraft income over the past decade, even going so far as to backdate checking purchases without consumer consent in order to charge more overdraft fees. Abuses like that are not a necessary component of any checking business. Ending those outrages will simply mean less money for banks, it will not mean more up-front charges for consumers. Banks do not need to charge new fees to “make up” for the lost revenue from tricks and traps. But that doesn’t mean banks won’t try to jack up your interest rate or sneak new fees into your checking account. Banks will do just about anything that makes them money if they think they can get away with it. BB&T, for instance used to charge its customers a $10 “service fee” for the courtesy of mailing out monthly statements. The bank didn’t tell its customers it was doing this, it just included a one-line charge on each monthly statement, hoping that customers wouldn’t catch the item and complain. BB&T didn’t start charging this fee because it needed to help poor people or fend off some new regulation, it just saw the opportunity to score an easy buck, and went for it. So you may very well find some unpleasant new fee in a banking statement this year. But it will have nothing to do with new consumer protections, regardless of what CNBC anchors tell you.

Read the full article →

David Isenberg: MPRI Couldn’t Read Minds: Let’s Sue Them

August 19, 2010

The interesting news today is that MPRI , one of the earliest U.S. private military contractors, albeit one that has operated strictly in a training capacity, is being sued. The suit, filed by the Genocide Victims of Krajina in Chicago Federal Court, against both MPRI and its parent company, L-3 Communications, alleges, that MPRI “trained and equipped the Croatian military for Operation Storm and designed the Operation Storm battle plan,” which killed or displaced more than 200,000 Serbs in 1995, in the largest European land offensive since World War II. The complainants demand billions of dollars in damages from MPRI, founded by former high-ranking U.S. military officers who were “downsized” at the end of the Cold War, and L-3 Communications, which bought MPRI for $40 million in 2000. Ahh, I feel some serendipitous nostalgia coming on., I first wrote about MPRI in 1997. Back then its not so modest advertising slogan claimed MPRI to be “the greatest corporate assemblage of military expertise in the world.” It provided basic training, doctrinal analysis, wargaming operations and non-military services in Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Founded in 1987 by eight former U.S. senior military officers, MPRI said it only operated in areas approved by the U.S. State Department. Although MPRI still operates in numerous countries overseas it is fairly low profile. You are more likely to hear about it in connection with its maritime, aviation, driving, and marksmanship simulators than about their work in Bosnia or Iraq. The background to its work in Croatia is that in March 1994 the Pentagon referred the Croatian Defense Minister to MPRI. For the next few years retired Major General Richard B. Griffitts led 15 MPRI employees in training the Croatian army so that it could provide national security and meet defense needs as Croatia transitioned into a democratic society. Reportedly the Croatian government hired MPRI to advise them on how to construct a civilian-controlled army and to provide leadership skills training. The U.S. State Department only approved MPRI’s activities after determining that the course did not involve tactical training or otherwise violate the 1991 U.N. Security Council arms embargo on Yugoslavia which made direct military assistance illegal. Subsequently, in May 1996, MPRI was granted a contract to train the military forces of Bosnia. 185 MPRI personnel participated in the US-supervised “Train and Equip” program. The program’s objective was to integrate and build up the Bosnian army of Muslims and Croats against the Serbs. Although MPRI denies conducting offensive operations, the August 1995 Operation Storm which resulted in Croatia recapturing its previously Serb-held Krajina region utilized typical American operational tactics, including integrated air, artillery and infantry movements, and the use of maneuver warfighting techniques to destroy Serbian command and control networks. Many observers at the time claimed the Croatians never could have done that without the training provided by MPRI. At the time that struck me as somewhat of a patronizing view, i.e., the pitiful, helpless, tumbling Croatians can’t do anything without help from former U.S. military personnel. A couple of months after writing the above report I wrote the script for a show on private military contractors. One of the people I interviewed was Lt. Gen. Ed Soyster (USA-Ret.), an MPRI Vice President and former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. I asked hmm about the charge that the Croatians could not have retaken the Krajina without MPRI’s prior training. His response was: INTERVIEWER: Somebody said the training provided by MPRI was helpful to Croatians in terms of their battlefield skills. Is that a correct assessment? GEN. SHOYSTER: It is not. It is not for a couple of reasons. One, we don’t teach in the battlefield skills. We do that in other places. We didn’t, we didn’t teach that in Croatia. That’s not what we were asked to do. And the other realization is, for the analysis, is that we went there in January of ’95, began instruction in April of ’95 because the rest was a course development and so forth to do that. We had one class of about 40 who had graduated in July from the, from the overall course. And the concept that one could go there, or go anywhere, no matter how brilliant your instruction may be, and turn an army around in a month, no, no serious military analyst would ever dream that anyone could do that. So it’s a, we had absolutely, gave no instruction in anything strategic: strategic planning, strategic operations, operational bit. Because that’s not what we were asked to do. And as a contractor you do what the contract says. We were not licensed to do that, and the Croatians never asked us to do that. So somehow in the process, because it was a well-coordinated attack, they look for an American footprint, or fingerprint. The only people they could find were MPRI. We were also accused of having 15 generals over there. We had 15 people over there, one general. And as you can imagine, if you’re an analyst and you think you would send in 15 generals to accomplish a task, not very good analysis. So fundamentally we taught the democracy transition assistance program, not related anything operational there. The credit goes to the Croatian army. … INTERVIEWER: Okay. Can you tell us just a little bit more about the specifics of what was taught during the Croatian democracy transition assistance program? GEN. SHOYSTER: Yes. I, I mentioned fundamentally the, that program. But it, it includes training of officers in the, in basic officer leadership skills and an understanding of where they fit into a democratic society. So we, we emphasize that. We teach general management, training management. We teach how to do planning, programming, the budgeting process, which is, which is new to them. And also an assistance in developing a noncommissioned officer corps. As you know, the Eastern Bloc characteristically did not have a what we would term a professional noncommissioned officer corps. They had a, an officer corps highly vested down at the lowest levels, and then they brought in conscripts. They saw the Western armies, recognized the importance of our noncommissioned officers, and so we’re assisting in developing that kind of professionalism and long-term growth and capability for their noncommissioned officers. Now I am not a lawyer, but even if you choose to ignore the above, it seems to me that the case against MPRI seems weak. The complaint that was filed in court says “allege that MPRI is liable for complicity in genocide. This crime has the same specificity as genocide, the only difference being that genocide requires a specific intent to kill or destroy the target groups whereas complicity in genocide requires knowledge that the perpetrator has that specific intent.” Genocide? Hold on there a moment. Were war crimes committed? I assume they certainly were. But genocide; I think not. Reportedly, during the Operation Storm and mainly in its aftermath between 116 (Croatian Helsinki Committee) and 1200 civilians (Serb statement) were killed and between 150.000 and 250.000 Serbs left the Krajina before the operation. The difference in the numbers of murdered civilians might be explained by the fact, that the distinction between soldiers and civilians was difficult. Part of the suit centers on the fact that back in WWII, when Croatia was a puppet state of Nazi Germany, some 600,000 Serbs and Jews were murdered in the killing fields of Jasenovac in Croatia. The complaint states: In 1994, when Defendant MPRI entered into negotiations with Croatia (to be amplified below), MPRI knew or reasonably should have known the open facts of the genocide at the Jasenovac Concentration Camp. MPRI knew or reasonably should have known of the intense hatred the Croats felt toward the Serbs. MPRI knew or reasonably should have known that the Croatian leaders with whom it was negotiating had been key figures in the Ustasha Party that fomented, organized and led the massacres at Jasenovac and other killing camps in Croatia during World War Two. This seems to be arguing that MPRI was negligent in not doing historical due diligence. It implies that MPRI was a charter member of the Psychic Friends Network, and should have known what was in the hearts and minds of the Croatians in 1994. That the Croatian acted in an unspeakably vile and inhuman manner towards Serbians and other ethnic groups back in WWII is inarguable. But to assert that Croatians still felt the same way more than 50 years later and that MPRI and L-3 were supposed to know that seems to me to be an incredibly weak argument. MPRI’s Croatian contract – officially termed the “Democracy Transition Assistance Program” was one of several in the region licensed by the State Department Office of Defense Trade Controls. Federal law requires companies who sell military goods or services abroad to register with the Office of Defense Trade Controls and obtain a license for each contract. Furthermore, even if you accept the argument that past historical animosities bear on contemporary contracts the simple truth of the matter is that it was the U.S. government which approved the contract. MPRI can’t undertake any contract overseas without first having it vetted and approved by the States Department. And, if anyone should be expected to be aware of past historical grievances it should be the diplomats at Foggy Bottom. So, if anyone should be sued it would be the State Department.

Read the full article →

David Isenberg: MPRI Couldn’t Read Minds: Let’s Sue Them

August 19, 2010

The interesting news today is that MPRI , one of the earliest U.S. private military contractors, albeit one that has operated strictly in a training capacity, is being sued. The suit, filed by the Genocide Victims of Krajina in Chicago Federal Court, against both MPRI and its parent company, L-3 Communications, alleges, that MPRI “trained and equipped the Croatian military for Operation Storm and designed the Operation Storm battle plan,” which killed or displaced more than 200,000 Serbs in 1995, in the largest European land offensive since World War II. The complainants demand billions of dollars in damages from MPRI, founded by former high-ranking U.S. military officers who were “downsized” at the end of the Cold War, and L-3 Communications, which bought MPRI for $40 million in 2000. Ahh, I feel some serendipitous nostalgia coming on., I first wrote about MPRI in 1997. Back then its not so modest advertising slogan claimed MPRI to be “the greatest corporate assemblage of military expertise in the world.” It provided basic training, doctrinal analysis, wargaming operations and non-military services in Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Founded in 1987 by eight former U.S. senior military officers, MPRI said it only operated in areas approved by the U.S. State Department. Although MPRI still operates in numerous countries overseas it is fairly low profile. You are more likely to hear about it in connection with its maritime, aviation, driving, and marksmanship simulators than about their work in Bosnia or Iraq. The background to its work in Croatia is that in March 1994 the Pentagon referred the Croatian Defense Minister to MPRI. For the next few years retired Major General Richard B. Griffitts led 15 MPRI employees in training the Croatian army so that it could provide national security and meet defense needs as Croatia transitioned into a democratic society. Reportedly the Croatian government hired MPRI to advise them on how to construct a civilian-controlled army and to provide leadership skills training. The U.S. State Department only approved MPRI’s activities after determining that the course did not involve tactical training or otherwise violate the 1991 U.N. Security Council arms embargo on Yugoslavia which made direct military assistance illegal. Subsequently, in May 1996, MPRI was granted a contract to train the military forces of Bosnia. 185 MPRI personnel participated in the US-supervised “Train and Equip” program. The program’s objective was to integrate and build up the Bosnian army of Muslims and Croats against the Serbs. Although MPRI denies conducting offensive operations, the August 1995 Operation Storm which resulted in Croatia recapturing its previously Serb-held Krajina region utilized typical American operational tactics, including integrated air, artillery and infantry movements, and the use of maneuver warfighting techniques to destroy Serbian command and control networks. Many observers at the time claimed the Croatians never could have done that without the training provided by MPRI. At the time that struck me as somewhat of a patronizing view, i.e., the pitiful, helpless, tumbling Croatians can’t do anything without help from former U.S. military personnel. A couple of months after writing the above report I wrote the script for a show on private military contractors. One of the people I interviewed was Lt. Gen. Ed Soyster (USA-Ret.), an MPRI Vice President and former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. I asked hmm about the charge that the Croatians could not have retaken the Krajina without MPRI’s prior training. His response was: INTERVIEWER: Somebody said the training provided by MPRI was helpful to Croatians in terms of their battlefield skills. Is that a correct assessment? GEN. SHOYSTER: It is not. It is not for a couple of reasons. One, we don’t teach in the battlefield skills. We do that in other places. We didn’t, we didn’t teach that in Croatia. That’s not what we were asked to do. And the other realization is, for the analysis, is that we went there in January of ’95, began instruction in April of ’95 because the rest was a course development and so forth to do that. We had one class of about 40 who had graduated in July from the, from the overall course. And the concept that one could go there, or go anywhere, no matter how brilliant your instruction may be, and turn an army around in a month, no, no serious military analyst would ever dream that anyone could do that. So it’s a, we had absolutely, gave no instruction in anything strategic: strategic planning, strategic operations, operational bit. Because that’s not what we were asked to do. And as a contractor you do what the contract says. We were not licensed to do that, and the Croatians never asked us to do that. So somehow in the process, because it was a well-coordinated attack, they look for an American footprint, or fingerprint. The only people they could find were MPRI. We were also accused of having 15 generals over there. We had 15 people over there, one general. And as you can imagine, if you’re an analyst and you think you would send in 15 generals to accomplish a task, not very good analysis. So fundamentally we taught the democracy transition assistance program, not related anything operational there. The credit goes to the Croatian army. … INTERVIEWER: Okay. Can you tell us just a little bit more about the specifics of what was taught during the Croatian democracy transition assistance program? GEN. SHOYSTER: Yes. I, I mentioned fundamentally the, that program. But it, it includes training of officers in the, in basic officer leadership skills and an understanding of where they fit into a democratic society. So we, we emphasize that. We teach general management, training management. We teach how to do planning, programming, the budgeting process, which is, which is new to them. And also an assistance in developing a noncommissioned officer corps. As you know, the Eastern Bloc characteristically did not have a what we would term a professional noncommissioned officer corps. They had a, an officer corps highly vested down at the lowest levels, and then they brought in conscripts. They saw the Western armies, recognized the importance of our noncommissioned officers, and so we’re assisting in developing that kind of professionalism and long-term growth and capability for their noncommissioned officers. Now I am not a lawyer, but even if you choose to ignore the above, it seems to me that the case against MPRI seems weak. The complaint that was filed in court says “allege that MPRI is liable for complicity in genocide. This crime has the same specificity as genocide, the only difference being that genocide requires a specific intent to kill or destroy the target groups whereas complicity in genocide requires knowledge that the perpetrator has that specific intent.” Genocide? Hold on there a moment. Were war crimes committed? I assume they certainly were. But genocide; I think not. Reportedly, during the Operation Storm and mainly in its aftermath between 116 (Croatian Helsinki Committee) and 1200 civilians (Serb statement) were killed and between 150.000 and 250.000 Serbs left the Krajina before the operation. The difference in the numbers of murdered civilians might be explained by the fact, that the distinction between soldiers and civilians was difficult. Part of the suit centers on the fact that back in WWII, when Croatia was a puppet state of Nazi Germany, some 600,000 Serbs and Jews were murdered in the killing fields of Jasenovac in Croatia. The complaint states: In 1994, when Defendant MPRI entered into negotiations with Croatia (to be amplified below), MPRI knew or reasonably should have known the open facts of the genocide at the Jasenovac Concentration Camp. MPRI knew or reasonably should have known of the intense hatred the Croats felt toward the Serbs. MPRI knew or reasonably should have known that the Croatian leaders with whom it was negotiating had been key figures in the Ustasha Party that fomented, organized and led the massacres at Jasenovac and other killing camps in Croatia during World War Two. This seems to be arguing that MPRI was negligent in not doing historical due diligence. It implies that MPRI was a charter member of the Psychic Friends Network, and should have known what was in the hearts and minds of the Croatians in 1994. That the Croatian acted in an unspeakably vile and inhuman manner towards Serbians and other ethnic groups back in WWII is inarguable. But to assert that Croatians still felt the same way more than 50 years later and that MPRI and L-3 were supposed to know that seems to me to be an incredibly weak argument. MPRI’s Croatian contract – officially termed the “Democracy Transition Assistance Program” was one of several in the region licensed by the State Department Office of Defense Trade Controls. Federal law requires companies who sell military goods or services abroad to register with the Office of Defense Trade Controls and obtain a license for each contract. Furthermore, even if you accept the argument that past historical animosities bear on contemporary contracts the simple truth of the matter is that it was the U.S. government which approved the contract. MPRI can’t undertake any contract overseas without first having it vetted and approved by the States Department. And, if anyone should be expected to be aware of past historical grievances it should be the diplomats at Foggy Bottom. So, if anyone should be sued it would be the State Department.

Read the full article →

Fisher Interactive Network Advances Social Media Strategy With New Director of Social Media Position

August 18, 2010

SEATTLE, WA–(Marketwire – August 18, 2010) –  Fisher Communications, Inc. ( NASDAQ : FSCI ), a leader in local media innovation, announced today that its digital division, Fisher Interactive Network, has promoted Jenny Kuglin to the position of Director of Social Media, responsible for advancing the company’s social media strategies, establishing policy and developing best practices for all of Fisher’s properties. 

Read the full article →

Blackhawk Network Announces Management Changes

August 18, 2010

PLEASANTON, CA–(Marketwire – August 18, 2010) –  Blackhawk Network, a leading provider of prepaid and financial payments products, today announced that Don Kingsborough has been appointed the company’s executive chairman of the Board of Directors. Under Kingsborough’s stewardship, as a founder and CEO, Blackhawk has grown to become one of the world’s leading prepaid card providers for consumers through a vast network of grocery, drug, convenience and mass retailers. Kingsborough’s role as executive chairman will allow him to focus on exploring new business opportunities, rather than day to day operations. 

Read the full article →

Michael Tasner: The Number One Secret to Marketing — Both Online and Offline

August 11, 2010

There have been tens of thousands (probably hundreds of thousands by now) of books, articles, audios, and videos written about marketing. Heck, I wrote the first book on Web 3.0 Marketing, so I fall into that category as well. All these books are great and full of information in their own respects, but there is just so much noise when it comes to marketing. Fortunately, there is one, overarching secret that applies to all businesses, and works for everyone. This secret, if mastered, can explode your business. Drumroll please . . . everything comes back to relationships . Building relationships is the most essential marketing weapon you could possess. There are so many outlets from which to build your relationships; social media, email marketing, video marketing, conversion, traffic, sales, leads, opt ins. The list goes on, and on and on. If you focus on the relationship (seeing your list as people versus emails) you are going to be 10 times better off in the long haul. I’d rather have a list of 100 people that know, like and trust me than a list of 100,000 twitter followers and 5,000 Facebook friends that don’t even know my last name. I’ve seen examples where people have massive mailing lists, over 100,000 names, and only 150 people open an email. I’d eliminate 99,000 of the names and focus on those 150 that are actually reading your stuff. I encourage you to look at all your different prospect touch points and see where you can infuse some relationship building into them. Here are 3 Keys to Help Build Profitable Relationships: 1. Practice education based marketing. Everyone has a different take on what education based marketing is. Some see it as educating people about your products and services. Relationship builders see it as a chance to educate prospects in general terms. You are able to build rapport by teaching before selling. Let’s take an example. You run a country club and are looking to increase membership. Most marketers would put together a flyer that talks about their golf course, the tennis courts, and the beautiful banquet facility. The education based marketing approach would be to put together informational articles or pamphlets such as: The 5 Benefits of Belonging to a Country Club 3 Ways to Increase Your Business through Country Clubs Rather than providing information about your particular club, you should focus on educating people in general. This will empower them to make an educated decision about purchasing your product or service. 2. Keep consistent contact. Make sure you’re staying in touch with your contacts on a regular basis. This could be as simple as sending an email with a link to an article you thought they might find valuable, or as advanced as picking up the phone and saying hello. To make certain your relationships do not get stale, communicate a few times every month. 3. Don’t be afraid to mine your list and your networks. I recommend mining your email list on a monthly basis. Remove people who haven’t opened your stuff in 6-12 months, and delete people off your social networks that don’t apply. If you keep your list and network clean, and practice keys #1 and #2, this network will turn into a profit house because you built strong relationships. Please keep in mind, building relationships takes time, but in the long haul, you will outperform any list, period. © 2010 Michael Tasner, author of Marketing in the Moment: The Practical Guide to Using Web 3.0 Marketing to Reach Your Customers First

Read the full article →

AirTight Appoints Steve Choi Managing Director, Asia-Pacific Sales

August 2, 2010

Choi Brings Deep Knowledge of Network Infrastructure Environment and Culture of Pacific Rim

Read the full article →

Video: Silva Says HSBC, BNP Buoyed by `Extremely Strong Brands’: Video

August 2, 2010

Aug. 2 (Bloomberg) — Ralph Silva, strategist at Silva Research Network, talks about HSBC Holdings Plc and BNP Paribas SA second-quarter earnings. He speaks with Andrea Catherwood on Bloomberg Television’s “The Pulse.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Matt Desch: Setting the Record Straight on Iridium

July 29, 2010

Hilary Kramer makes a number of important points in The Huffington Post story alleging faulty equipment is being supplied to our country’s combat troops. Unfortunately, the article included claims about Iridium that are entirely incorrect. The author cited a “first-call connection rate of only 80 percent.” The fact is that Iridium’s call completion rates are consistently greater than 95% from anywhere on the planet with a clear view of the sky. This has been validated by independent third-party consultants and our customers including the U.S. Government. With 66 operational satellites and 7 in-orbit spares, and major ongoing enhancements to the network infrastructure, Iridium is in a strong position to continue providing high reliability through 2015, when the first of our “Iridium NEXT” next-generation satellites are scheduled to be launched into orbit. In addition, it is important to remember that Iridium phones are not cell phones, but they do cover the entire Earth’s surface, where cellphones actually cover only less than 10 percent of the Earth’s surface. With respect to 16-year-old sailor Abby Sunderland, the facts are that she used her Iridium phone from the Indian Ocean on June 10th to speak with her parents to relay the good news she had successfully repaired her engine. Shortly thereafter a massive wave flooded her boat, disabled her engine and damaged her phone in the process. Huffington Post’s readers can read Abby’s account and Abby mentions Iridium on her own website . Iridium has more than 375,000 subscribers, many of whom depend on Iridium for reliable mission-critical communications day-in and day-out. They include first responders rushing to the aid of earthquake and hurricane victims, firefighters struggling against wildfires, ships on the high seas, aircraft flying across wide open spaces, medical evacuation helicopters transferring patients to a hospital, oil and gas workers in the far northern regions of Alaska and — yes — soldiers on combat duty in Afghanistan and other places around the world. Iridium is proud to provide reliable communications services globally to all of these diverse users of our system.

Read the full article →

Video: Silva Says Stress Tests Timing `Fiscally Irresponsible’

July 21, 2010

July 21 (Bloomberg) — Ralph Silva of Silva Research Network talks about the outlook for the results of stress tests on 91 European banks. Silva, speaking to Maryam Nemazee on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown,” also discusses earnings and trading activity at U.S. investment banks.

Read the full article →

Jason Gurwin: Live Sports 2.0: The Digital Revolution

July 19, 2010

So you go to the arena and you’re sitting in the nose bleed seats, there’s a drunk guy sitting next to you who won’t stop shouting expletives or blowing into his vuvuzela, and its only the first quarter. Just wait until you have to spend 25 minutes in line to use the bathroom to dispose of the $8 soda you bought. It’s no wonder that people prefer to stay home and watch the game on their 65″ HDTV than drop a week’s worth of salary to bring their family to cheer on their favorite team. The biggest difficulty with creating a great in-venue experience is that there is no control over whether your team wins or loses. As a marketer for a sports team, your job is to ensure that you have a great time no matter if your team is shutout or wins a “nail biter.” In the past, that meant cheerleaders, video clips on the jumbotron, and random giveaways. Today, there are some pretty innovative pieces of technology that can make the live experience that much better. One of coolest new pieces of live venue technology is a system called Kangaroo TV . It bridges the gap between what’s great about watching sports at home, the access to information, and what’s great about going to the event, the energy of the venue. Last month, I had the pleasure of attending the final round of the US Open at Pebble Beach. Unless you have a rooting interest, live golf is up there with the “National Paint Drying Championship.” You miss 90% of the action and your view is often obstructed. Then comes Kangaroo TV. With just a deposit on the device, the handheld 3G-based system provided access to live video of the NBC’s US Open broadcast, as well as additional video feeds including featured pairings, holes, and even the blimp cam. In addition, you could follow the leaderboard or dig into player stats or scorecards. Golf is just the beginning. This technology will be available starting this fall at Miami Dolphins games. It will give you access to the NFL RedZone channel as well as broadcasts to other NFL games. This isn’t the first handheld device to merge the live event with the digital world. In 2007, the Nintendo Fan Network was launched at Safeco Field in Seattle that allowed Nintendo DS users to access baseball content (stats, scores, video etc.), chat with other fans, and even order concessions directly from the device. The question is – why require proprietary hardware like KangarooTV or a gaming system like Nintendo DS when nearly every tech savvy sports fan has a smartphone? Back in 2004, AT&T Park became the first WiFi-equipped sports venue. They also launched an online platform called “Giants Digital Dugout” that provides WiFi video replays, game content, and venue maps. The iPhone app development community has even begun to take on the problem. At Rupp Arena at the University of Kentucky, an iPhone application called “FanGo” has allowed fans to order food directly from their seats. DirecTV even has an iPhone app called NFL Sunday Ticket To-Go that allows NFL Sunday Ticket subscribers to watch any NFL game directly from their iPhone, Android, or Blackberry device. This is just the beginning. There is a huge opportunity here to innovate on the live game experience. Imagine sitting at a baseball game with the live video stream on your iPad and being able to tap on a player to pull up their virtual trading card. Imagine being able to view the twitter stream of all those tweeting about the game. Imagine after a loss getting the option to purchase a discounted ticket to another game as a special bonus for attending the game. With 3DTV no longer a pipe dream, sports teams will have to find new ways to draw fans to their venues – especially when they’re not winning. I don’t have a solution for the exorbitant costs of going to a sporting event, but there is tremendous room to create a more dynamic live experience. However, the solution is not a fragmented set of technologies. The one that will win is the one that creates the ultimate fan experience in one application on the user’s own hardware. And if it also includes a feature so you never need to wait on line at the bathroom, I think you just might have hit the jackpot.

Read the full article →

Fox Business Segment On Runaway Toyotas Teased With An Awkwardly Sad Song (VIDEO)

July 14, 2010

Earlier today, the Fox Business Network decided to tease a segment on unexpected acceleration in Toyotas with an odd musical choice. A Toyota internal investigation and a preliminary government report, Reuters notes today , suggests that driver error may play a bigger role in some of the Toyota throttle problems than previously thought. A full government decision on issue has is not expected for months. Apparently wanting to make light of the situation, which has resulted as many as 89 deaths, Fox Business decided to use a semi-ironic musical accompaniment. As the network headed to commercial, the host said, “Finally some answers in the case of those runaway Toyotas, but we may be very surprised to hear the cause of the problem….” The music accompanying the tease, ” Fast Car ” by Tracy Chapman. If you haven’t heard the song, it’s incredibly depressing. WATCH the Fox Business segment below:

Read the full article →

Timing Of George Steinbrenner’s Death Could Mean His Heirs Will Dodge Estate Tax

July 13, 2010

CHICAGO — Born on the Fourth of July, George Steinbrenner left the world stage with a great sense of timing too. By dying in 2010, the billionaire and long-time New York Yankees owner’s wealth avoids the federal estate tax, likely saving his heirs enough money to field an entire team of Alex Rodriguezes. Steinbrenner’s death Tuesday came during an unplanned year-long gap in the estate tax, the first since it was enacted in 1916. Political wrangling has stalemated efforts in Congress to replace the tax that expired in 2009. That deprives the government of billions of dollars in annual revenue but represents an unexpected bonanza for those who inherit wealth. “If you’re super-wealthy, it’s a good year to die,” said Jack Nuckolls, an attorney and estate planner with the accounting firm BDO Seidman. “It really is.” The death of the 80-year-old Steinbrenner, who had been in poor health for years, highlights a quirky tax situation that has drawn much scrutiny among the moneyed but little on Main Street. Only those with estates valued at more than $3.5 million had to pay under the old law. Without knowing the exact details of Steinbrenner’s holdings and estate plan, it’s impossible to say how much money will be saved. But estate planners and tax experts say it’s likely that the estate benefited hugely by the timing of his death. A glance at some numbers suggests roughly how it may work. Forbes magazine has estimated Steinbrenner’s estate at $1.1 billion. The federal estate tax in 2009 was 45 percent, with the $3.5 million per-person exemption. If he had died last year, his estate could thus have faced federal taxes of almost $500 million, depending on how the estate was structured. That doesn’t mean his heirs permanently escape all taxes related to his assets. They will still have to ultimately pay a capital gains tax if and when assets are sold. And due to a change in tax law this year, the tax would be applied to the amount by which the assets have appreciated since Steinbrenner acquired them. Even if the Steinbrenners sold the assets right away, the top capital gains tax rate is 15 percent. Worst-case scenario, depending on how much the assets appreciated after Steinbrenner acquired them: a $165 million tax bill. That’s a tax break of about $328 million. A-Rod’s 2010 salary: $32 million. The Steinbrenner family has not suggested any sale is planned. “There are no succession issues, and the team will not be sold,” Yankees president Randy Levine said. The Steinbrenners therefore are expected to avoid what happened to the family of Chicago Cubs owner P.K. Wrigley after he died in 1977. The family was forced to sell the Cubs to the Tribune Co. four years later to pay the taxes on Wrigley’s estate. As Steinbrenner’s Yankees transformed into Yankee Global Enterprises, which includes the cable TV operation YES Network and Legends Hospitality, estate planning issues for a transfer to his children were dealt with, according to a Yankees official who spoke on condition of anonymity because those details weren’t released Estate taxes can be reduced through certain planning measures – such as gifts and asset sales to family members at discounted values. However, except for the unusual circumstances of 2010, they cannot be eliminated unless you give it all to charity. Some wealthy families use trusts to lower estate taxes. But even transferring assets to family trusts wouldn’t have significantly lessened Steinbrenner’s federal tax liability unless he gave vast amounts of assets to relatives as gifts before he died. Those would have been subject to a large gift tax. That’s unlikely since very few people choose to pay a large tax anount sooner than necessary, according to Richard Behrendt, senior estate planner for Baird Financial Advisors in Milwaukee and a former estate tax attorney for the Internal Revenue Service. The estate tax is scheduled to return in 2011, with a top rate of 55 percent. The House passed a bill last year that would have extended the estate tax at the 2009 rates, but it stalled in the Senate. Many Republicans want to eliminate the federal estate tax altogether, while many Democrats want to extend it at the 2009 rates. There had been talk on Capitol Hill of reinstating it retroactively, to the start of the year. But as the year progresses, lawmakers say that is increasingly unlikely. “If Congress doesn’t go retroactive, then he picked a great year to die,” said Robert Steele, who heads of the trusts and estates department at the law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz in New York. “There will be possibly tremendous capital gains tax, but the capital gains rate is a lot lower than the estate tax rate would have been.” ___ Ohlemacher reported from Washington. AP Sports Writer Ronald Blum also contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Timing Of George Steinbrenner’s Death Could Mean His Heirs Will Dodge Estate Tax

July 13, 2010

CHICAGO — Born on the Fourth of July, George Steinbrenner left the world stage with a great sense of timing too. By dying in 2010, the billionaire and long-time New York Yankees owner’s wealth avoids the federal estate tax, likely saving his heirs enough money to field an entire team of Alex Rodriguezes. Steinbrenner’s death Tuesday came during an unplanned year-long gap in the estate tax, the first since it was enacted in 1916. Political wrangling has stalemated efforts in Congress to replace the tax that expired in 2009. That deprives the government of billions of dollars in annual revenue but represents an unexpected bonanza for those who inherit wealth. “If you’re super-wealthy, it’s a good year to die,” said Jack Nuckolls, an attorney and estate planner with the accounting firm BDO Seidman. “It really is.” The death of the 80-year-old Steinbrenner, who had been in poor health for years, highlights a quirky tax situation that has drawn much scrutiny among the moneyed but little on Main Street. Only those with estates valued at more than $3.5 million had to pay under the old law. Without knowing the exact details of Steinbrenner’s holdings and estate plan, it’s impossible to say how much money will be saved. But estate planners and tax experts say it’s likely that the estate benefited hugely by the timing of his death. A glance at some numbers suggests roughly how it may work. Forbes magazine has estimated Steinbrenner’s estate at $1.1 billion. The federal estate tax in 2009 was 45 percent, with the $3.5 million per-person exemption. If he had died last year, his estate could thus have faced federal taxes of almost $500 million, depending on how the estate was structured. That doesn’t mean his heirs permanently escape all taxes related to his assets. They will still have to ultimately pay a capital gains tax if and when assets are sold. And due to a change in tax law this year, the tax would be applied to the amount by which the assets have appreciated since Steinbrenner acquired them. Even if the Steinbrenners sold the assets right away, the top capital gains tax rate is 15 percent. Worst-case scenario, depending on how much the assets appreciated after Steinbrenner acquired them: a $165 million tax bill. That’s a tax break of about $328 million. A-Rod’s 2010 salary: $32 million. The Steinbrenner family has not suggested any sale is planned. “There are no succession issues, and the team will not be sold,” Yankees president Randy Levine said. The Steinbrenners therefore are expected to avoid what happened to the family of Chicago Cubs owner P.K. Wrigley after he died in 1977. The family was forced to sell the Cubs to the Tribune Co. four years later to pay the taxes on Wrigley’s estate. As Steinbrenner’s Yankees transformed into Yankee Global Enterprises, which includes the cable TV operation YES Network and Legends Hospitality, estate planning issues for a transfer to his children were dealt with, according to a Yankees official who spoke on condition of anonymity because those details weren’t released Estate taxes can be reduced through certain planning measures – such as gifts and asset sales to family members at discounted values. However, except for the unusual circumstances of 2010, they cannot be eliminated unless you give it all to charity. Some wealthy families use trusts to lower estate taxes. But even transferring assets to family trusts wouldn’t have significantly lessened Steinbrenner’s federal tax liability unless he gave vast amounts of assets to relatives as gifts before he died. Those would have been subject to a large gift tax. That’s unlikely since very few people choose to pay a large tax anount sooner than necessary, according to Richard Behrendt, senior estate planner for Baird Financial Advisors in Milwaukee and a former estate tax attorney for the Internal Revenue Service. The estate tax is scheduled to return in 2011, with a top rate of 55 percent. The House passed a bill last year that would have extended the estate tax at the 2009 rates, but it stalled in the Senate. Many Republicans want to eliminate the federal estate tax altogether, while many Democrats want to extend it at the 2009 rates. There had been talk on Capitol Hill of reinstating it retroactively, to the start of the year. But as the year progresses, lawmakers say that is increasingly unlikely. “If Congress doesn’t go retroactive, then he picked a great year to die,” said Robert Steele, who heads of the trusts and estates department at the law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz in New York. “There will be possibly tremendous capital gains tax, but the capital gains rate is a lot lower than the estate tax rate would have been.” ___ Ohlemacher reported from Washington. AP Sports Writer Ronald Blum also contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Timing Of George Steinbrenner’s Death Could Mean His Heirs Will Dodge Estate Tax

July 13, 2010

CHICAGO — Born on the Fourth of July, George Steinbrenner left the world stage with a great sense of timing too. By dying in 2010, the billionaire and long-time New York Yankees owner’s wealth avoids the federal estate tax, likely saving his heirs enough money to field an entire team of Alex Rodriguezes. Steinbrenner’s death Tuesday came during an unplanned year-long gap in the estate tax, the first since it was enacted in 1916. Political wrangling has stalemated efforts in Congress to replace the tax that expired in 2009. That deprives the government of billions of dollars in annual revenue but represents an unexpected bonanza for those who inherit wealth. “If you’re super-wealthy, it’s a good year to die,” said Jack Nuckolls, an attorney and estate planner with the accounting firm BDO Seidman. “It really is.” The death of the 80-year-old Steinbrenner, who had been in poor health for years, highlights a quirky tax situation that has drawn much scrutiny among the moneyed but little on Main Street. Only those with estates valued at more than $3.5 million had to pay under the old law. Without knowing the exact details of Steinbrenner’s holdings and estate plan, it’s impossible to say how much money will be saved. But estate planners and tax experts say it’s likely that the estate benefited hugely by the timing of his death. A glance at some numbers suggests roughly how it may work. Forbes magazine has estimated Steinbrenner’s estate at $1.1 billion. The federal estate tax in 2009 was 45 percent, with the $3.5 million per-person exemption. If he had died last year, his estate could thus have faced federal taxes of almost $500 million, depending on how the estate was structured. That doesn’t mean his heirs permanently escape all taxes related to his assets. They will still have to ultimately pay a capital gains tax if and when assets are sold. And due to a change in tax law this year, the tax would be applied to the amount by which the assets have appreciated since Steinbrenner acquired them. Even if the Steinbrenners sold the assets right away, the top capital gains tax rate is 15 percent. Worst-case scenario, depending on how much the assets appreciated after Steinbrenner acquired them: a $165 million tax bill. That’s a tax break of about $328 million. A-Rod’s 2010 salary: $32 million. The Steinbrenner family has not suggested any sale is planned. “There are no succession issues, and the team will not be sold,” Yankees president Randy Levine said. The Steinbrenners therefore are expected to avoid what happened to the family of Chicago Cubs owner P.K. Wrigley after he died in 1977. The family was forced to sell the Cubs to the Tribune Co. four years later to pay the taxes on Wrigley’s estate. As Steinbrenner’s Yankees transformed into Yankee Global Enterprises, which includes the cable TV operation YES Network and Legends Hospitality, estate planning issues for a transfer to his children were dealt with, according to a Yankees official who spoke on condition of anonymity because those details weren’t released Estate taxes can be reduced through certain planning measures – such as gifts and asset sales to family members at discounted values. However, except for the unusual circumstances of 2010, they cannot be eliminated unless you give it all to charity. Some wealthy families use trusts to lower estate taxes. But even transferring assets to family trusts wouldn’t have significantly lessened Steinbrenner’s federal tax liability unless he gave vast amounts of assets to relatives as gifts before he died. Those would have been subject to a large gift tax. That’s unlikely since very few people choose to pay a large tax anount sooner than necessary, according to Richard Behrendt, senior estate planner for Baird Financial Advisors in Milwaukee and a former estate tax attorney for the Internal Revenue Service. The estate tax is scheduled to return in 2011, with a top rate of 55 percent. The House passed a bill last year that would have extended the estate tax at the 2009 rates, but it stalled in the Senate. Many Republicans want to eliminate the federal estate tax altogether, while many Democrats want to extend it at the 2009 rates. There had been talk on Capitol Hill of reinstating it retroactively, to the start of the year. But as the year progresses, lawmakers say that is increasingly unlikely. “If Congress doesn’t go retroactive, then he picked a great year to die,” said Robert Steele, who heads of the trusts and estates department at the law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz in New York. “There will be possibly tremendous capital gains tax, but the capital gains rate is a lot lower than the estate tax rate would have been.” ___ Ohlemacher reported from Washington. AP Sports Writer Ronald Blum also contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

Video: Shanks Says Steinbrenner Had Huge Impact on Sports TV: Video

July 13, 2010

July 13 (Bloomberg) — Eric Shanks, president of Fox Sports, talks with Bloomberg’s Michele Steele about the death of New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner and the network’s plans to honor him during tonight’s broadcast of the 81st Major League Baseball All-Star Game. They speak from Angels Stadium in Anaheim, California. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

BLADE Network Technologies Appoints Michael Lethbridge as Its First Canada Country Manager

July 13, 2010

SANTA CLARA, CA–(Marketwire – July 13, 2010) –  BLADE Network Technologies, Inc. (BLADE), a trusted leader in data center networking, announced the appointment of Michael Lethbridge as the company’s first country manager for Canada. Michael has extensive sales management experience with Canadian IT companies such as SunGard Availability Services (Canada), McData Corporation and EMC Corporation of Canada. A native of Canada, Michael will work from BLADE’s Toronto office.

Read the full article →

Silver Peak Systems Appoints Francisco Pinto as Vice President of Latin America and the Caribbean

July 12, 2010

SANTA CLARA, CA–(Marketwire – July 12, 2010) – Silver Peak Systems, Inc. , the leader in data center class Wide Area Network (WAN) optimization, today announced that Francisco Pinto has joined the company as vice president of Latin America and the Caribbean. In this role, Mr. Pinto will be responsible for growing Silver Peak’s presence in those regions through partner development and new customer acquisition.

Read the full article →

The Zumobi Network Appoints Jon Tuck as Vice President of Sponsorship and Sales and Brenda Walker as Vice President of Marketing

July 8, 2010

Seasoned Executives Join Mobile App Network to Support Its Growth and Development

Read the full article →

Video: Silva Says Most Banks Will Pass European Stress Tests

July 7, 2010

July 7 (Bloomberg) — Ralph Silva of Silva Research Network talks about European bank stress tests. He speaks on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown” with Maryam Nemazee.

Read the full article →

Video: Greece’s Rundown Railroads Creak Under Heavy Debt Burden

July 7, 2010

July 7 (Bloomberg) — Bloomberg’s Nicole Itano reports from Athens on the debts of the Greek railroad system, which owes 11 billion euros ($13.8 billion), equal to about 1,100 euros per citizen. The government has pledged to stem losses for at least part of the network and attract a buyer within a year.

Read the full article →

David Isenberg: KBR Gives Uncle Sam the One Finger Salute

July 3, 2010

Le’s take a brief look at the world of rent a generals. Specifically, Lt. Gen. Sanchez. (USA-Ret.). Gen. Sanchez had a distinguished Army career and honorably served his country. He was the highest-ranking Hispanic in the United States Army when he retired on November 1, 2006. Those who can remember past yesterday will recall that he served as the V Corps commander of coalition forces in Iraq from June 2003 to June 2004. While his time as commander was not without controversies ( hostile relations with Paul Bremer, torture scandal at Abu Ghraib, development of the Iraq insurgency) I assume he did the best he could. For most retired officers that would have been enough. But evidently not for Gen. Sanchez. Evidently he felt the need to continue the fight; only now against U.S. civilians and injured veterans. In February it was reported that the U.S. Army wass trying to stop him from continuing to be an expert for KBR in a lawsuit against it over civilian truck driver deaths and injuries. Sanchez is being paid $650 an hour and has reviewed documents and written a report that support’s KBR’s contention it should not be held legally responsible for the deaths of six civilian truck drivers and the injuries of others in a 2004 ambush in Iraq. The suing drivers and family members contend that KBR should have stopped the convoys when it was warned that attacks would increase on April 9, 2004, the first anniversary of the day allies in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq reached Baghdad. KBR argues that the military approved sending the convoys out and several laws protect KBR from responsibility in a wartime situation. The Army contracts with KBR to provide transportation, food services and other logistical support. In his report for KBR on the 2004 ambush, Sanchez writes that KBR leadership was getting “emotional, hyperbolic, CNN-filtered, open source information, not intelligence” that was warning that the convoys could be ambushed. Sanchez says no battlefield leader could have known the convoy would be attacked. KBR leadership did stop convoys the day after six civilians were killed and 14 injured in the truck convoy ambush. But KBR is also fighting law suits regarding the burn pits it operated in Iraq as I have written about here and here . To see KBR’s last update to the allegations click here . KBR apparently thinks Gen. Sanchez has useful advice to offer here, even though I don’t recall the general having expertise in chemistry or toxicology. Nevertheless KBR, to emulate Paddy” Chayefsky’s famed movie Network, is mad as hell and is not going to take it anymore. The evidence is contained in Exhibit 40, filed back on Feb. 23. I have put the most pertinet parts in boldface. It is important to remember that KBR is in this position now because of the conduct of the United States. First, as the Army’s own AR 15-6 Report clearly admits, but for the Army’s failures in its own processes and procedures on April 9, 2004, the attack, injuries, and deaths associated with the Fisher case would never even have occurred. Second, but for the United States’ refusal to support KBR’s effort in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the District Court’s 2006 total dismissal of the lawsuits passed on the Political Question Doctrine, there is every reason to believe the Fifth Circuit would have sustained the dismissal. Instead, KBR (and indeed the United States itself in any future Political Question Doctrine dispute) is saddled with a very troublesome Fifth Circuit standard.’ Accordingly, KBR must be able to present the live trial expert testimony of Lieutenant General Sanchez, and to do so in precisely the form and content in which his report was submitted to the Court. This need was exacerbated by Judge Miller’s blatant disregard of the four military declarations submitted in his denial of KBR’s Political Question Doctrine motion, making the General’s live trial testimony possibly the only evidence that will sway Judge Miller. Further, his testimony, including his statement reiterating the AR 15-6 Report’s admission of Army fault, will provide precisely the type of evidence needed to prove on appeal that these cases should have been dismissed on the basis of the Political Question Doctrine – that is, among other things, the failure to do so caused Army officers to present public criticism of each other at trial! As we made clear in our original December 4, 2009 request, as a result of his senior military leadership position in Iraq during the relevant time period, Lieutenant General Sanchez has unique relevant expertise that is not available from any other source. As reflected in his report, the General will testify from that expertise about the circumstances in Iraq in April 2004, the Army’s prosecution of the war, KBR’s logistics support mission, and the actual events up to and on April 8 and 9, 2004 upon which these lawsuits are based. This expert testimony is crucial to KBR’s ability to defend itself on key issues such as state of mind, causation, and various affirmative defenses. Lastly, as you know, throughout the five years of these lawsuits, KBR has carefully refrained from pointing its finger at the United States as the culpable entity. One result of KBR’s restraint in this regard has been that plaintiffs in these cases have gained a huge advantage in the public airing of these lawsuits. Plaintiffs have co-opted the Houston media and other press into presenting only the damning evidence plaintiffs allege prove that KBR intended to injure and kill its own employees for profit. As trial looms, KBR can no longer sit silent, and instead intends to aggressively make its case to the public, hopefully to prevent the entire jury pool from being ‘ We also urge the United States to support KBR in the litigation of these defenses in any appeal that KBR files in these cases. prejudiced against the company. Towards this end, KBR intends to release Lieutenant General Sanchez’s expert report and deposition testimony to the press as part of this campaign. KBR greatly appreciates the support the Army has provided the company in these (and other) lawsuits. But given the untenable posture of the cases and enormous exposure faced by KBR, we cannot overstate the need for the Army to approve this request for reconsideration, We trust that you will give this matter your full, serious, and immediate attention. For those who remember Mario Puzo, KBR seems to be channeling the GodFather, and is making a Army thinly veiled offer it can’t refuse. It will be interesting to see who blinks.

Read the full article →

QinetiQ North America Appoints Rick Finn to Lead Homeland Security Business Unit

July 1, 2010

IT Expert to Lead Network, Information Assurance Efforts

Read the full article →

← Previous Entries

Next Entries →