http://wallstcheatsheet.com/investing/how-the-iphone-got-tail-fins-part-two.html/
Read it. Good article explaining how the iPhone emulates Chevy's strategy to compete against Ford.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Ebenezer
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/top-5-facts-america-richest-1-183022655.html
Hey guys,
Came across this article and found it to be Breakfast Club worthy. Plus I haven't posted in a while, so I thought I'd keep the lifeline going on this blog.
The reason I posted this was simply for the shock value it gave me. I find all of this to be completely absurd. Millionaires today complain about Obama's bleeding heart policies to tax the rich and give to the poor, but I find this article a good reason to do just that. We need to divert some of this income and wealth away from the rich and greedy to the poor and needy. Shit, not even the poor and needy, how about the middle class, most of which pay a higher percentage in income taxes than do these millionaires. The increasing gap between the rich and poor is becoming a problem, and the middle class is a dying breed.
In no way does this mean I undermine the value of these millionaires and all they have contributed to society. In fact, I think the U.S wouldn't be at the top of the economic hill without some of these people. I do find it unfair how much influence they have over U.S policies, the economy, and our overall "Well Being" as a nation.
Hey guys,
Came across this article and found it to be Breakfast Club worthy. Plus I haven't posted in a while, so I thought I'd keep the lifeline going on this blog.
The reason I posted this was simply for the shock value it gave me. I find all of this to be completely absurd. Millionaires today complain about Obama's bleeding heart policies to tax the rich and give to the poor, but I find this article a good reason to do just that. We need to divert some of this income and wealth away from the rich and greedy to the poor and needy. Shit, not even the poor and needy, how about the middle class, most of which pay a higher percentage in income taxes than do these millionaires. The increasing gap between the rich and poor is becoming a problem, and the middle class is a dying breed.
In no way does this mean I undermine the value of these millionaires and all they have contributed to society. In fact, I think the U.S wouldn't be at the top of the economic hill without some of these people. I do find it unfair how much influence they have over U.S policies, the economy, and our overall "Well Being" as a nation.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Steve Jobs isn't dead, kids.
As you all know, unless you live under a rock, yesterday the Silicon Valley witnessed one of the most saddening days in the short yet prolific history of the tech industry as we know it. Steve Jobs resigned as the CEO of Apple, Inc, citing health issues and the fact that he had always promised he would step down when he felt he could not longer meet his duties as chief executive officer.
The way that this was received by the media and [not so knowledgable] Apple followers was just outright ridiculous. On every news channel, the current program was interrupted to make the announcement as if our President had been assassinated; facebook was flooded with "goodbye Steve" status updates; every news article calls this a "shocking" or "stunning" resignation. Apple stock fell 7% after hours, and some analysts proclaimed the end of Apple as we know it.
Really? Seriously? This is surprising? Huh? Who is surprised by this? We are talking about a near 60 year old man that is a mere 3 years removed from liver cancer and a liver transplant who suffers from acute malabsorption and hasn't technically run the company since it's stock broke $150. That would be Tim Cook, which brings me to my next point. Apple is done? First, the day-to-day operations at Apple have been the responsibility of Tim Cook for several years, and Johnny Ive (head of Industrial Design) is the mastermind behind the great products that have made Apple what it is. Steve Jobs was the visionary, the marketing master, the guy everyone anxiously awaited to hear at product releases. NEWSFLASH: Steve Jobs is still the Chairman of the Board. Steve Jobs is still the visionary. Tim Cook is still running the company. And if anyone believes that Apple doesn't have their entire business planned out for the next 3-5 years then that someone knows nothing about the tech world. The way I see it, the resignation of Jobs was symbolically saddening, but fundamentally little changed outside of E cabinet titles.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad this event is receiving much deserved press as arguably the greatest CEO in the history of our country passes the torch. But for the sake of Apple and the future of the company, they went from having the greatest CEO in the country, Steve Jobs, to the greatest CEO in the country, Tim Cook. Sorry, Google.
The way that this was received by the media and [not so knowledgable] Apple followers was just outright ridiculous. On every news channel, the current program was interrupted to make the announcement as if our President had been assassinated; facebook was flooded with "goodbye Steve" status updates; every news article calls this a "shocking" or "stunning" resignation. Apple stock fell 7% after hours, and some analysts proclaimed the end of Apple as we know it.
Really? Seriously? This is surprising? Huh? Who is surprised by this? We are talking about a near 60 year old man that is a mere 3 years removed from liver cancer and a liver transplant who suffers from acute malabsorption and hasn't technically run the company since it's stock broke $150. That would be Tim Cook, which brings me to my next point. Apple is done? First, the day-to-day operations at Apple have been the responsibility of Tim Cook for several years, and Johnny Ive (head of Industrial Design) is the mastermind behind the great products that have made Apple what it is. Steve Jobs was the visionary, the marketing master, the guy everyone anxiously awaited to hear at product releases. NEWSFLASH: Steve Jobs is still the Chairman of the Board. Steve Jobs is still the visionary. Tim Cook is still running the company. And if anyone believes that Apple doesn't have their entire business planned out for the next 3-5 years then that someone knows nothing about the tech world. The way I see it, the resignation of Jobs was symbolically saddening, but fundamentally little changed outside of E cabinet titles.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad this event is receiving much deserved press as arguably the greatest CEO in the history of our country passes the torch. But for the sake of Apple and the future of the company, they went from having the greatest CEO in the country, Steve Jobs, to the greatest CEO in the country, Tim Cook. Sorry, Google.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Another Factoid: US Debt and what it means
For those of you who I haven't met and don't know who the eff I am, let me preface this by saying I am currently working for Grant Thornton as an Audit Intern. Every week in our work inboxes, we get weekly updates and publications about important changes in the financial world and how it would affect Accounting practices and standards. Today this blurb came up in my feed and I thought it would be interesting to share with the rest of you. The blurb:
Current practice issue
U.S. Treasury rates still considered to be “risk-free”
On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor’s (S&P) lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating of the United States from AAA to AA+. In a June 2009 document, “Understanding Standard and Poor’s Rating Definitions,” S&P noted that an AA+ rating differs from an AAA rating by only a small degree and that no global corporate debtor with an AA+ credit rating has defaulted on its debt between 1981 and 2008. Additionally, neither of the other two major rating agencies has lowered its long-term outlook on U.S. obligations.
Although a credit rating of AA+ is one level below an AAA rating, we believe that U.S. Treasury rates would still be considered a “risk-free interest rate” and a “benchmark interest rate” under U.S. GAAP. U.S. Treasury rates can still be considered a “risk-free interest rate” when such rate is required for measurement purposes under the FASB Accounting Standards Codification® (ASC or Codification) because of the information noted above. U.S. Treasury rates can also still be considered a “benchmark interest rate,” as defined in the Codification, because these rates continue to be a “widely recognized and quoted rate in an active financial market that is broadly indicative of the overall level of interest rates attributable to high-credit-quality obligors in that market.”
While S&P’s downgrade of U.S. treasuries has no impact on their use as a risk-free interest rate or benchmark interest rate, there may be other financial reporting implications of this downgrade, including enhanced disclosures.
Personally this gives me great hope that even though the U.S is in a major debt crisis, we can bounce back from all of this madness. While U.S treasuries aren't provided the best returns (to say the least), I have reasonable assurance that whatever return is promised will in fact be paid out (see what I did there?) Even with China as our biggest debt holder, I feel the U.S. will do everything it can to remain in China's good grace. Besides, they knew this day was coming.
2 Posts in 2 days. Let's keep this blog alive.
Current practice issue
U.S. Treasury rates still considered to be “risk-free”
On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor’s (S&P) lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating of the United States from AAA to AA+. In a June 2009 document, “Understanding Standard and Poor’s Rating Definitions,” S&P noted that an AA+ rating differs from an AAA rating by only a small degree and that no global corporate debtor with an AA+ credit rating has defaulted on its debt between 1981 and 2008. Additionally, neither of the other two major rating agencies has lowered its long-term outlook on U.S. obligations.
Although a credit rating of AA+ is one level below an AAA rating, we believe that U.S. Treasury rates would still be considered a “risk-free interest rate” and a “benchmark interest rate” under U.S. GAAP. U.S. Treasury rates can still be considered a “risk-free interest rate” when such rate is required for measurement purposes under the FASB Accounting Standards Codification® (ASC or Codification) because of the information noted above. U.S. Treasury rates can also still be considered a “benchmark interest rate,” as defined in the Codification, because these rates continue to be a “widely recognized and quoted rate in an active financial market that is broadly indicative of the overall level of interest rates attributable to high-credit-quality obligors in that market.”
While S&P’s downgrade of U.S. treasuries has no impact on their use as a risk-free interest rate or benchmark interest rate, there may be other financial reporting implications of this downgrade, including enhanced disclosures.
Personally this gives me great hope that even though the U.S is in a major debt crisis, we can bounce back from all of this madness. While U.S treasuries aren't provided the best returns (to say the least), I have reasonable assurance that whatever return is promised will in fact be paid out (see what I did there?) Even with China as our biggest debt holder, I feel the U.S. will do everything it can to remain in China's good grace. Besides, they knew this day was coming.
2 Posts in 2 days. Let's keep this blog alive.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Facebook finally getting it
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Facebook-to-let-users-apf-2207684620.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=6&asset=&ccode=
Came across this article on Yahoo, and thought I'd share some of my personal insight/opinion on the matter.
Honestly, it's about damn time Facebook enacted something of this nature. I was personally sick and tired of being tagged in drunken videos and pictures that I didn't want made public to Friends, friends of friends, and anyone who happened to stumble across my page. Although I took the time to sift through and change my privacy settings, many people are either too oblivious or don't want to spend ten minutes changing the Facebook settings themselves. I didn't find changing the settings all too difficult, but I can't say the same for other users' FB savvy. My reasons for changing my privacy settings related to the growing reality that employers creep through potential hires' pages. While I may disagree with the reasoning behind this, it has become a sad reality. For me and many others, Facebook is a place to interact and socialize with my friends, not to display my prowess in school or the workplace. That's what my LinkedIn account is for. I think Facebook is making a step in the right direction concerning it's user privacy policies. For me, this article has been "liked".
Came across this article on Yahoo, and thought I'd share some of my personal insight/opinion on the matter.
Honestly, it's about damn time Facebook enacted something of this nature. I was personally sick and tired of being tagged in drunken videos and pictures that I didn't want made public to Friends, friends of friends, and anyone who happened to stumble across my page. Although I took the time to sift through and change my privacy settings, many people are either too oblivious or don't want to spend ten minutes changing the Facebook settings themselves. I didn't find changing the settings all too difficult, but I can't say the same for other users' FB savvy. My reasons for changing my privacy settings related to the growing reality that employers creep through potential hires' pages. While I may disagree with the reasoning behind this, it has become a sad reality. For me and many others, Facebook is a place to interact and socialize with my friends, not to display my prowess in school or the workplace. That's what my LinkedIn account is for. I think Facebook is making a step in the right direction concerning it's user privacy policies. For me, this article has been "liked".
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Invest in Algae
Sup Guys,
Hopefully this social/economic/governmental shmorgasbord of a topic is something that the breakfast club approves of.
Thinking of what I wanted to write for my first blog post was a task for me, but I finally came to terms with a subject about which I feel very strongly for. Namely oil. Namely, the WORLD's (not just the U.S) dependence on it and what we can do to curb it.
First off, I was like to preface this with some facts and background:
-Canada is the largest supplier of oil to the U.S. Period. In the top ten suppliers of oil, there are only three middle eastern countries, Saudi Arabia being third in line. (The reason I bring this fact in is to negate the belief that the Middle East perpetuates every oil price spike in the world. It simply isn't true)
-The rising demand for oil in rapidly expanding countries like China are spiking oil's prices.
-We have around 50 years left of PROVEN oil reserves (give or take on the estimate, this what I have heard in class).
-Oil use perpetuates the world's changing climate
Biodiesel alternatives to oil:
Ethanol made from corn
Ethanol made from soybeans
Algae. This magical little autotroph gobbles up sunlight and through photosynthesis produces oil. With some technological ingenuity, humans can harvest this oil as an EXTREMELY efficient and viable alternative to petroleum based oil. Algae can produce somewhere in the area of 1500X more gallons of bio-diesel per acre than corn can.
Why should we choose to invest in algae? Problems associated with petroleum based products like weather change are going to continue. Not to mention the fact that we're going to run out of it in our lifetime. To put it simply, we need to make moves. Big ones. And I think the government should step in and create (albeit artificial) demand for algae. If the U.S pinoeers this kind of research and establishes a modest supply at a competitive price, this could be the next energy boom that the world needs. Only once the playing field is level and there are some viable substitutes for oil can we begin to move away from it.
Here's some insightful info on algae and oil from some Poly students (Hell yea)
Hopefully this social/economic/governmental shmorgasbord of a topic is something that the breakfast club approves of.
Thinking of what I wanted to write for my first blog post was a task for me, but I finally came to terms with a subject about which I feel very strongly for. Namely oil. Namely, the WORLD's (not just the U.S) dependence on it and what we can do to curb it.
First off, I was like to preface this with some facts and background:
-Canada is the largest supplier of oil to the U.S. Period. In the top ten suppliers of oil, there are only three middle eastern countries, Saudi Arabia being third in line. (The reason I bring this fact in is to negate the belief that the Middle East perpetuates every oil price spike in the world. It simply isn't true)
-The rising demand for oil in rapidly expanding countries like China are spiking oil's prices.
-We have around 50 years left of PROVEN oil reserves (give or take on the estimate, this what I have heard in class).
-Oil use perpetuates the world's changing climate
Biodiesel alternatives to oil:
Ethanol made from corn
Ethanol made from soybeans
Algae. This magical little autotroph gobbles up sunlight and through photosynthesis produces oil. With some technological ingenuity, humans can harvest this oil as an EXTREMELY efficient and viable alternative to petroleum based oil. Algae can produce somewhere in the area of 1500X more gallons of bio-diesel per acre than corn can.
Why should we choose to invest in algae? Problems associated with petroleum based products like weather change are going to continue. Not to mention the fact that we're going to run out of it in our lifetime. To put it simply, we need to make moves. Big ones. And I think the government should step in and create (albeit artificial) demand for algae. If the U.S pinoeers this kind of research and establishes a modest supply at a competitive price, this could be the next energy boom that the world needs. Only once the playing field is level and there are some viable substitutes for oil can we begin to move away from it.
Here's some insightful info on algae and oil from some Poly students (Hell yea)
Monday, June 6, 2011
Guns, Oil, And The West
Gentlemen,
Poppin' the Cherry, whatup!
So I have been thinking lately about the uprisings across the Middle East and Northern Africa.
The Facts:
The Way I See It:
Guns: These seemingly peaceful protests are being crushed by domestic authorities using live ammo. These countries have been building up their military arsenals for years (probably in the name of defending themselves against Israel ) and now they can squash any "peasants" who defy them. These dictators/monarchs are like trapped animals, they are faced with being exiled or killed if they lose control.
Oil: Oil is a depleting resource, I don't know the exact figure but I imagine that a great deal of oil revenue goes to the monarchs (or dictators) who control the countries. As I see it, once oil is depleted in this region, they will have nothing but sand. If these countries continue on the path that they are on (with the monarchs/dictators claiming the proceeds as personal wealth) these countries will be fucked, having nothing to keep their economies afloat once oil is depleted. Logically, what makes sense is investing the revenue from oil in education (specifically STEM). They need to be at the forefront of innovation or working towards it before time (Oil) runs out.
The West: What can we do?! It's a slippery slope, if we set a precedent that the "West" will liberate any people from oppressive rule, we would be fucked. If we stand on the sidelines and watch, we will be witness to mass murder (and what does that make us?).
Summary:
If protests don't receive external support they will likely fail. Domestic authorities will use brutal suppressive tactics until calm is achieved.
There are three main questions within this post that I think would be interesting to discuss (definitely don't limit it to these):
Poppin' the Cherry, whatup!
So I have been thinking lately about the uprisings across the Middle East and Northern Africa.
The Facts:
- So far the countries that have been successful are Egypt and Tunisia.
- Libya is the only country with NATO assistance.
- Other countries with populist movements: Syria, Bahrain, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Morocco, and Jordan.
The Way I See It:
Guns: These seemingly peaceful protests are being crushed by domestic authorities using live ammo. These countries have been building up their military arsenals for years (probably in the name of defending themselves against Israel ) and now they can squash any "peasants" who defy them. These dictators/monarchs are like trapped animals, they are faced with being exiled or killed if they lose control.
Oil: Oil is a depleting resource, I don't know the exact figure but I imagine that a great deal of oil revenue goes to the monarchs (or dictators) who control the countries. As I see it, once oil is depleted in this region, they will have nothing but sand. If these countries continue on the path that they are on (with the monarchs/dictators claiming the proceeds as personal wealth) these countries will be fucked, having nothing to keep their economies afloat once oil is depleted. Logically, what makes sense is investing the revenue from oil in education (specifically STEM). They need to be at the forefront of innovation or working towards it before time (Oil) runs out.
The West: What can we do?! It's a slippery slope, if we set a precedent that the "West" will liberate any people from oppressive rule, we would be fucked. If we stand on the sidelines and watch, we will be witness to mass murder (and what does that make us?).
Summary:
If protests don't receive external support they will likely fail. Domestic authorities will use brutal suppressive tactics until calm is achieved.
There are three main questions within this post that I think would be interesting to discuss (definitely don't limit it to these):
- GUNS: Is it possible for these people to liberate themselves without "western" assistance?
- OIL: Is the future for this region as bleak as I perceive it?
- THE WEST: What should the "West" do?
The Purpose
What's up gentlemen,
Kyle and I created this blog with the intention of it serving as a thinktank and discussion board for a select few young and interesting people that are worth talking with. That's not to imply that everyone else is not worth our time, but...
The point would be that each of us has the permission to log on and post any idea, article, or topic for debate related to economics, finance, or politics, preferably of the controversial variety. My hope is that many of these posts will spark some intelligent, heated debates via the comments section. Posts should be relatively intellectual in nature, and while this whole blog is sure to be full of jokes and BS, don't be a douche and make your first post about Representative Weiner's weiner. I think if we can get this going and everyone participates actively--that is, contributes at least one post a week, and comments at least once on each post--it will end up being an engaging and interesting way to stay in touch with each other and the world.
If you have any suggestions whatsoever on improving this idea, post them. If you think this is a dumbass idea that you are not interested in, post that too. If you have any other intelligent, interesting people that you think would be into this kind of thing and would add something to this blog, make it a post with a little about the person, and we'll vote them in (2/3rds passes). I think that somewhere between 6 and 12 people would be adequate (we currently have 4 or 5, so a few more right away would be good).
This is what our friend Kyle posted as his facebook status around the time I suggested we start this blog: "It's too bad that everyone who has a solution for everything is at home commenting on the internet".
Kyle and I created this blog with the intention of it serving as a thinktank and discussion board for a select few young and interesting people that are worth talking with. That's not to imply that everyone else is not worth our time, but...
The point would be that each of us has the permission to log on and post any idea, article, or topic for debate related to economics, finance, or politics, preferably of the controversial variety. My hope is that many of these posts will spark some intelligent, heated debates via the comments section. Posts should be relatively intellectual in nature, and while this whole blog is sure to be full of jokes and BS, don't be a douche and make your first post about Representative Weiner's weiner. I think if we can get this going and everyone participates actively--that is, contributes at least one post a week, and comments at least once on each post--it will end up being an engaging and interesting way to stay in touch with each other and the world.
If you have any suggestions whatsoever on improving this idea, post them. If you think this is a dumbass idea that you are not interested in, post that too. If you have any other intelligent, interesting people that you think would be into this kind of thing and would add something to this blog, make it a post with a little about the person, and we'll vote them in (2/3rds passes). I think that somewhere between 6 and 12 people would be adequate (we currently have 4 or 5, so a few more right away would be good).
This is what our friend Kyle posted as his facebook status around the time I suggested we start this blog: "It's too bad that everyone who has a solution for everything is at home commenting on the internet".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)