Making Money Scams

The magic of the free market and the wisdom of our Wall Street producers/betters at work:

Earlier this year I wrote about the Jefferson County story in a piece called “Looting Main Street” in Rolling Stone. In this tale employees of a group of high-powered Wall Street banks, led in particular by JP Morgan Chase, funneled money to local politicians in Alabama, who in turn signed off on toxic interest-rate swap deals that left the county saddled with monstrous debt for a generation.

Jefferson County is essentially the world’s worst credit card story. The local pols ran up massive bills to build a “Taj Mahal of sewer-treatment plants,” then saddled future voters with a blizzard-worth of rate hikes, punitive fees and late charges. Alabamans who should have paid $250 million for their new sewer system now owe over $3 billion, thanks to their corrupt politicians and the greedy carpetbagger banks who dragged these local hicks into deadly derivative deals.

These types of finance scams are the template for a whole new type of symbiotic relationship between politicians and the financial services industry: deals like the JeffCo interest-rate swaps allow politicians to borrow vast sums essentially without immediate consequence, making it possible to green-light politically-popular programs during their terms but leaving future leaders holding the bag when the bills come due. We saw similar stories in Greece and in the Denver school system; hundreds of communities in Italy and other European countries are also experiencing similar debt-blowups thanks to rate swaps and other deadly deals.

Anyway, back in the mid-nineties, the average sewer bill for a Jefferson County family of four was only $14.71. By the time I wrote my story earlier this year, most citizens were paying about four times that amount – and as of this summer, the average JeffCo sewer bill was $63. Well, the news now comes out that rates will go up again, and in the best case scenario they will jump 25% a year. The worst case? Jefferson County sewer rates could jump as much as 527%, with some estimates placing the average monthly bill as high as $395 a month.

At some point, people are going to figure out that our current corrupt capitalist system isn’t about the efficient allocation of capital, but straight up robbery and thieving. Not any time soon, I suspect, but some day.

Assholes, Bring on the Brawndo!, Free Markets Solve Everything, Tax Policy | 4:20 pm |

The magic of the free market and the wisdom of our Wall Street producers/betters at work:

Earlier this year I wrote about the Jefferson County story in a piece called “Looting Main Street” in Rolling Stone. In this tale employees of a group of high-powered Wall Street banks, led in particular by JP Morgan Chase, funneled money to local politicians in Alabama, who in turn signed off on toxic interest-rate swap deals that left the county saddled with monstrous debt for a generation.

Jefferson County is essentially the world’s worst credit card story. The local pols ran up massive bills to build a “Taj Mahal of sewer-treatment plants,” then saddled future voters with a blizzard-worth of rate hikes, punitive fees and late charges. Alabamans who should have paid $250 million for their new sewer system now owe over $3 billion, thanks to their corrupt politicians and the greedy carpetbagger banks who dragged these local hicks into deadly derivative deals.

These types of finance scams are the template for a whole new type of symbiotic relationship between politicians and the financial services industry: deals like the JeffCo interest-rate swaps allow politicians to borrow vast sums essentially without immediate consequence, making it possible to green-light politically-popular programs during their terms but leaving future leaders holding the bag when the bills come due. We saw similar stories in Greece and in the Denver school system; hundreds of communities in Italy and other European countries are also experiencing similar debt-blowups thanks to rate swaps and other deadly deals.

Anyway, back in the mid-nineties, the average sewer bill for a Jefferson County family of four was only $14.71. By the time I wrote my story earlier this year, most citizens were paying about four times that amount – and as of this summer, the average JeffCo sewer bill was $63. Well, the news now comes out that rates will go up again, and in the best case scenario they will jump 25% a year. The worst case? Jefferson County sewer rates could jump as much as 527%, with some estimates placing the average monthly bill as high as $395 a month.

At some point, people are going to figure out that our current corrupt capitalist system isn’t about the efficient allocation of capital, but straight up robbery and thieving. Not any time soon, I suspect, but some day.

Assholes, Bring on the Brawndo!, Free Markets Solve Everything, Tax Policy | 4:20 pm |

robert shumake

Photo of the Week: iPad in Colorado | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Photo of the Week: iPad in Colorado. Find more Site News news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Gates Foundation Backs ABC <b>News</b> Project - NYTimes.com

The Gates Foundation gives a $1.5 million grant to ABC News to support the network's reporting on various global health crises.

Fox <b>News</b> Duped By Report That Los Angeles Will Spend $1 Billion On <b>...</b>

WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW** Fox News reported that Los Angeles is going to spend $1 billion on jetpacks that can fly a person up to 63 miles per hour and soar to heights of 8000 feet.

robert shumake

Photo of the Week: iPad in Colorado | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Photo of the Week: iPad in Colorado. Find more Site News news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Gates Foundation Backs ABC <b>News</b> Project - NYTimes.com

The Gates Foundation gives a $1.5 million grant to ABC News to support the network's reporting on various global health crises.

Fox <b>News</b> Duped By Report That Los Angeles Will Spend $1 Billion On <b>...</b>

WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW** Fox News reported that Los Angeles is going to spend $1 billion on jetpacks that can fly a person up to 63 miles per hour and soar to heights of 8000 feet.

robert shumake

The magic of the free market and the wisdom of our Wall Street producers/betters at work:

Earlier this year I wrote about the Jefferson County story in a piece called “Looting Main Street” in Rolling Stone. In this tale employees of a group of high-powered Wall Street banks, led in particular by JP Morgan Chase, funneled money to local politicians in Alabama, who in turn signed off on toxic interest-rate swap deals that left the county saddled with monstrous debt for a generation.

Jefferson County is essentially the world’s worst credit card story. The local pols ran up massive bills to build a “Taj Mahal of sewer-treatment plants,” then saddled future voters with a blizzard-worth of rate hikes, punitive fees and late charges. Alabamans who should have paid $250 million for their new sewer system now owe over $3 billion, thanks to their corrupt politicians and the greedy carpetbagger banks who dragged these local hicks into deadly derivative deals.

These types of finance scams are the template for a whole new type of symbiotic relationship between politicians and the financial services industry: deals like the JeffCo interest-rate swaps allow politicians to borrow vast sums essentially without immediate consequence, making it possible to green-light politically-popular programs during their terms but leaving future leaders holding the bag when the bills come due. We saw similar stories in Greece and in the Denver school system; hundreds of communities in Italy and other European countries are also experiencing similar debt-blowups thanks to rate swaps and other deadly deals.

Anyway, back in the mid-nineties, the average sewer bill for a Jefferson County family of four was only $14.71. By the time I wrote my story earlier this year, most citizens were paying about four times that amount – and as of this summer, the average JeffCo sewer bill was $63. Well, the news now comes out that rates will go up again, and in the best case scenario they will jump 25% a year. The worst case? Jefferson County sewer rates could jump as much as 527%, with some estimates placing the average monthly bill as high as $395 a month.

At some point, people are going to figure out that our current corrupt capitalist system isn’t about the efficient allocation of capital, but straight up robbery and thieving. Not any time soon, I suspect, but some day.

Assholes, Bring on the Brawndo!, Free Markets Solve Everything, Tax Policy | 4:20 pm |

The magic of the free market and the wisdom of our Wall Street producers/betters at work:

Earlier this year I wrote about the Jefferson County story in a piece called “Looting Main Street” in Rolling Stone. In this tale employees of a group of high-powered Wall Street banks, led in particular by JP Morgan Chase, funneled money to local politicians in Alabama, who in turn signed off on toxic interest-rate swap deals that left the county saddled with monstrous debt for a generation.

Jefferson County is essentially the world’s worst credit card story. The local pols ran up massive bills to build a “Taj Mahal of sewer-treatment plants,” then saddled future voters with a blizzard-worth of rate hikes, punitive fees and late charges. Alabamans who should have paid $250 million for their new sewer system now owe over $3 billion, thanks to their corrupt politicians and the greedy carpetbagger banks who dragged these local hicks into deadly derivative deals.

These types of finance scams are the template for a whole new type of symbiotic relationship between politicians and the financial services industry: deals like the JeffCo interest-rate swaps allow politicians to borrow vast sums essentially without immediate consequence, making it possible to green-light politically-popular programs during their terms but leaving future leaders holding the bag when the bills come due. We saw similar stories in Greece and in the Denver school system; hundreds of communities in Italy and other European countries are also experiencing similar debt-blowups thanks to rate swaps and other deadly deals.

Anyway, back in the mid-nineties, the average sewer bill for a Jefferson County family of four was only $14.71. By the time I wrote my story earlier this year, most citizens were paying about four times that amount – and as of this summer, the average JeffCo sewer bill was $63. Well, the news now comes out that rates will go up again, and in the best case scenario they will jump 25% a year. The worst case? Jefferson County sewer rates could jump as much as 527%, with some estimates placing the average monthly bill as high as $395 a month.

At some point, people are going to figure out that our current corrupt capitalist system isn’t about the efficient allocation of capital, but straight up robbery and thieving. Not any time soon, I suspect, but some day.

Assholes, Bring on the Brawndo!, Free Markets Solve Everything, Tax Policy | 4:20 pm |

robert shumake

Photo of the Week: iPad in Colorado | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Photo of the Week: iPad in Colorado. Find more Site News news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Gates Foundation Backs ABC <b>News</b> Project - NYTimes.com

The Gates Foundation gives a $1.5 million grant to ABC News to support the network's reporting on various global health crises.

Fox <b>News</b> Duped By Report That Los Angeles Will Spend $1 Billion On <b>...</b>

WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW** Fox News reported that Los Angeles is going to spend $1 billion on jetpacks that can fly a person up to 63 miles per hour and soar to heights of 8000 feet.

Making Money

languagehat, this is a giant derail, so I it's going to be my last post in this thread. Your "trying to appear cool" remark was to me so off the wall that I actually had trouble even understanding what you were getting at - now that you've elaborated, at least I think I now understand what you were getting at (it's not the reading of history per se that's trying to "appear cool", but your belief that expressing a lack of surprise in this case is something of a pose because being unsurprised is somehow cool(?!) - I'm still not 100% sure I'm getting it right, it's so bizarre).



On the substance - being grief-stricken is not the same thing as being surprised, at least in my book (of course, my book may not be cool). If I heard my friend/spouse etc. was killed, I'd be grief-stricken. And I'd be *shocked*, but in the same way as any sudden dramatic news is shocking - it's akin to being startled. Yet, being startled is not the same thing as being surprised. I'm startled by a noise, I'm not surprised by it. I'm startle to hear my friend was killed in an auto-accident, I'm not surprised that he died. If he was abducted by aliens, I'd be surprised. If he was killed by a car, while meditating in a remote monastery (the car dropped from a cargo airplane hit the monastery). But killed in traffic? Shock, grief, but no surprise. Do you understand the difference? I say this in good faith, illustrating the differences. Of course, if all you are interested in is exploring how I must be motivated by trying to appear "cool", then I guess we'll part ways.



Same here. I'm not surprised in the least - anti-establishment movements are deeply penetrated by intelligence services. That's not surprising. A high ranking member is compromised - it's not surprising. These organizations are targeted relentlessly. The FBI had a multi-year operation to penetrate a knitting circle (I think that actually happened with the Los Angeles police intelligence unit investigating some anti-war person or another) - color me surprised.



Anyhow, at the risk of appearing cool - or is it uncool - I'm now signing off from this thread, with my surprised face.
posted by VikingSword at 1:05 PM on September 14

Yet Another Study Shows Musicians Making More Money

from the well,-look-at-that dept

We've made the argument repeatedly that saying unauthorized file sharing is hurting the music business lacks evidence. Instead, what we've seen, over and over again, is that more money is pouring into the music business, more music is being produced and (most importantly) that more musicians who embrace this new world are doing better than they would have otherwise. Now, we've pointed to research in the UK, Sweden and the US that have all shown aggregate growth for the music business, with some of the numbers suggesting more money going directly to musicians, rather than gatekeepers.



The latest study, highlighted by TorrentFreak takes a similar look at the Norwegian music market to show very similar findings and (of course) that musicians are, indeed, benefiting:



Like the UK and Swedish studies, this study, covering Norway, found that the aggregate amount going to the industry is up slightly (4% in real terms), mostly thanks to live shows more than making up for the decline in music sales (it's important to note that these researchers appear to have modeled their research on both the UK and Swedish studies, and made only slight changes, which they explain (and justify) in the report. The key finding is that musicians appear to be making significantly more these days than in the past:

Total artist revenues have gone from NOK 208 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, which is an increase of about 162%. Excluding state subsidization, the income from 1999 to 2009 has increased with NOK 229 million, or 147%....



According to this, Norwegian artists have seen an increase in all four of their income sources during the past eleven years. This goes contrary to the common belief that artists have seen a decline in income because of the digitalization of the industry.



The loss of record sales because of consequences of the digitalization of the industry has not affected the Norwegian artists in the same brutal way as it has the record companies. Artists earn in general 20% or less from record sales, and a decrease in record sales would most likely be compensated by an increase in one or more of the other three income sources.

Now, it's worth pointing out -- as I learned when I attended Nordic Music Week last year -- that the Norwegian music industry is heavily subsidized by the government, which is one of the four revenue streams discussed above. However, that only represents about 30% of artist revenue in 2009. The largest single component -- again similar to what we've seen elsewhere -- is live revenue, which continues to grow. Even if you exclude state subsidies, the report found that Norwegian artists doubled their income in the past 11 years:

Adjusted for inflation, total artist revenue has gone from NOK 255 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, an increase of about NOK 290 million or 114%. Excluding state subsidizations, the increase has changed from NOK 192 million to NOK 386 million, which is an increase of NOK 194 million or 101% This goes to show that the artists themselves, as a group, have seen tremendous more growth than the industry as a whole.

And, yes, there are more musicians out there to split the pie, but the growth rate in the industry has increased more quickly than the growth in musicians.

Since the total number of artists in 1999 and 2009 are available to the authors, it is possible to calculate an average income from music for artists in Norway. With 3200 artists in 1999 the average income from music would be about NOK 65 000. With 4100 artists in 2009 the average income from music is about NOK 133 000, creating an increase of NOK 68 000 or 105%. Adjusted for inflation the income has increased with from about NOK 80 000 to NOK 133 000, an increase of NOK 53 000, an increase of 66%.

Overall, the results, like those in Sweden and the UK, seem to clearly debunk the repeated claims from recording industry folks (and some musicians) that artists are somehow suffering under this new setup. Now, there may absolutely be cases where artists who fail to adapt are struggling, and there's no doubt that some labels that failed to adapt are struggling -- but there's increasingly little evidence that the overall music industry or artists as a whole are suffering. All of the evidence seems to suggest that it's not file sharing that's a problem at all. More money is going into the music business. The only problems are from those in the industry too stubborn or too clueless to adapt to capture the money that's flowing in.

27 Comments | Leave a Comment..

robert shumake

<b>News</b> and Publications - <b>News</b> Release

News and Publications - News Release. ... Academy in the news � News links � Ingenia � Photo Gallery. News Release. 08 July 2010. Academy elects 'unique national resource' to assist in economic recovery. Fifty three of the UK's leading ...

Great <b>news</b>: Donald Trump hinting at presidential run « Hot Air

Great news: Donald Trump hinting at presidential run.

Exclusive: I have some big <b>news</b>... | Ausiello | EW.com

You may need a hug after you read this. Or I may need one. Sources confirm to me exclusively that… I just made pretty much the most difficult decision of my ...

robert shumake

<b>News</b> and Publications - <b>News</b> Release

News and Publications - News Release. ... Academy in the news � News links � Ingenia � Photo Gallery. News Release. 08 July 2010. Academy elects 'unique national resource' to assist in economic recovery. Fifty three of the UK's leading ...

Great <b>news</b>: Donald Trump hinting at presidential run « Hot Air

Great news: Donald Trump hinting at presidential run.

Exclusive: I have some big <b>news</b>... | Ausiello | EW.com

You may need a hug after you read this. Or I may need one. Sources confirm to me exclusively that… I just made pretty much the most difficult decision of my ...

robert shumake

















languagehat, this is a giant derail, so I it's going to be my last post in this thread. Your "trying to appear cool" remark was to me so off the wall that I actually had trouble even understanding what you were getting at - now that you've elaborated, at least I think I now understand what you were getting at (it's not the reading of history per se that's trying to "appear cool", but your belief that expressing a lack of surprise in this case is something of a pose because being unsurprised is somehow cool(?!) - I'm still not 100% sure I'm getting it right, it's so bizarre).



On the substance - being grief-stricken is not the same thing as being surprised, at least in my book (of course, my book may not be cool). If I heard my friend/spouse etc. was killed, I'd be grief-stricken. And I'd be *shocked*, but in the same way as any sudden dramatic news is shocking - it's akin to being startled. Yet, being startled is not the same thing as being surprised. I'm startled by a noise, I'm not surprised by it. I'm startle to hear my friend was killed in an auto-accident, I'm not surprised that he died. If he was abducted by aliens, I'd be surprised. If he was killed by a car, while meditating in a remote monastery (the car dropped from a cargo airplane hit the monastery). But killed in traffic? Shock, grief, but no surprise. Do you understand the difference? I say this in good faith, illustrating the differences. Of course, if all you are interested in is exploring how I must be motivated by trying to appear "cool", then I guess we'll part ways.



Same here. I'm not surprised in the least - anti-establishment movements are deeply penetrated by intelligence services. That's not surprising. A high ranking member is compromised - it's not surprising. These organizations are targeted relentlessly. The FBI had a multi-year operation to penetrate a knitting circle (I think that actually happened with the Los Angeles police intelligence unit investigating some anti-war person or another) - color me surprised.



Anyhow, at the risk of appearing cool - or is it uncool - I'm now signing off from this thread, with my surprised face.
posted by VikingSword at 1:05 PM on September 14

Yet Another Study Shows Musicians Making More Money

from the well,-look-at-that dept

We've made the argument repeatedly that saying unauthorized file sharing is hurting the music business lacks evidence. Instead, what we've seen, over and over again, is that more money is pouring into the music business, more music is being produced and (most importantly) that more musicians who embrace this new world are doing better than they would have otherwise. Now, we've pointed to research in the UK, Sweden and the US that have all shown aggregate growth for the music business, with some of the numbers suggesting more money going directly to musicians, rather than gatekeepers.



The latest study, highlighted by TorrentFreak takes a similar look at the Norwegian music market to show very similar findings and (of course) that musicians are, indeed, benefiting:



Like the UK and Swedish studies, this study, covering Norway, found that the aggregate amount going to the industry is up slightly (4% in real terms), mostly thanks to live shows more than making up for the decline in music sales (it's important to note that these researchers appear to have modeled their research on both the UK and Swedish studies, and made only slight changes, which they explain (and justify) in the report. The key finding is that musicians appear to be making significantly more these days than in the past:

Total artist revenues have gone from NOK 208 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, which is an increase of about 162%. Excluding state subsidization, the income from 1999 to 2009 has increased with NOK 229 million, or 147%....



According to this, Norwegian artists have seen an increase in all four of their income sources during the past eleven years. This goes contrary to the common belief that artists have seen a decline in income because of the digitalization of the industry.



The loss of record sales because of consequences of the digitalization of the industry has not affected the Norwegian artists in the same brutal way as it has the record companies. Artists earn in general 20% or less from record sales, and a decrease in record sales would most likely be compensated by an increase in one or more of the other three income sources.

Now, it's worth pointing out -- as I learned when I attended Nordic Music Week last year -- that the Norwegian music industry is heavily subsidized by the government, which is one of the four revenue streams discussed above. However, that only represents about 30% of artist revenue in 2009. The largest single component -- again similar to what we've seen elsewhere -- is live revenue, which continues to grow. Even if you exclude state subsidies, the report found that Norwegian artists doubled their income in the past 11 years:

Adjusted for inflation, total artist revenue has gone from NOK 255 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, an increase of about NOK 290 million or 114%. Excluding state subsidizations, the increase has changed from NOK 192 million to NOK 386 million, which is an increase of NOK 194 million or 101% This goes to show that the artists themselves, as a group, have seen tremendous more growth than the industry as a whole.

And, yes, there are more musicians out there to split the pie, but the growth rate in the industry has increased more quickly than the growth in musicians.

Since the total number of artists in 1999 and 2009 are available to the authors, it is possible to calculate an average income from music for artists in Norway. With 3200 artists in 1999 the average income from music would be about NOK 65 000. With 4100 artists in 2009 the average income from music is about NOK 133 000, creating an increase of NOK 68 000 or 105%. Adjusted for inflation the income has increased with from about NOK 80 000 to NOK 133 000, an increase of NOK 53 000, an increase of 66%.

Overall, the results, like those in Sweden and the UK, seem to clearly debunk the repeated claims from recording industry folks (and some musicians) that artists are somehow suffering under this new setup. Now, there may absolutely be cases where artists who fail to adapt are struggling, and there's no doubt that some labels that failed to adapt are struggling -- but there's increasingly little evidence that the overall music industry or artists as a whole are suffering. All of the evidence seems to suggest that it's not file sharing that's a problem at all. More money is going into the music business. The only problems are from those in the industry too stubborn or too clueless to adapt to capture the money that's flowing in.

27 Comments | Leave a Comment..

How to Making Money

Comments

Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts

1. 
   
   
   

   I have been following the emergence and ultimate convergence of Internet and TV. The real crux will be content ownership and some sites made deals a year ago to produce shows for them. The ultimate switch will be similar to when the traditional networks lost eyes to cable channels. One misconception IMHO is this over 30 under 30 idea. Using age to demonstrate adaption trends is short sighted and frankly offensive. It puts into the social consciousness a sort of age bias that those over "40" already struggle with. It reminds me of an earlier decade belief in not trusting someone over 30. Not good relationship management.

   
   
   

   Posted by: Judith Copeland |
   September 29, 2010 9:02 PM

   
   
















2. 
   
   
   

   the problem with clicker is everyone already knows where to get the legal main content. Theres not too many places you can get ABC , FOX, NBC .. etc. They aren't solving a real problem. The real problem is finding all the places that I can find it outside of those channels if you know what I mean.

   
   
   

   Posted by: guest |
   September 29, 2010 9:55 PM

   
   
















3. 
   
   
   

   Google TV has the opportunity to be a transformative milestone in the realization of TV convergence. Google’s Android platform in every user’s home will be open to developers, including Clicker, to run apps that will be able to engage viewers in unprecedented manners. Leaned-back couch potatoes will be offered opportunities to lean-forward and curate their converged media, share, learn take actions.

   
   
   

   Closed captioning of both broadcast & online video will be a significant basis for converged TV experiences. Congress has passed, and the President will soon sign, directives to the FCC to have U.S. commercial broadcasters include these time-coded transcripts in all broadcast video content offered online. These metadata can be used by semantic engines to derive highly granular dynamic understanding of the content and better present viewers with powerful recommendations.
   
   

   
   
   

    Posted by: R Macdonald |
   September 29, 2010 9:59 PM

   
   
















4. 
   
   
   

   Well if Google starts working on it, there's a little chance for other companies unless they can come up with a real innovation and withstand the temptation of selling it out to google. As for online TV, I really hope that they find a smart compromise between producers protecting their content and users wanting it all for free.

   
   
   

   Posted by: essay_writing |
   September 30, 2010 1:45 AM

   
   
















5. 
   
   
   

   The switch from TV over the internet was always going to happen. It will be interesting to see how many peple embrace this change!

   
   
   

    Posted by: Dom |
   September 30, 2010 2:01 AM

   
   
















6. 
   
   
   

   It is expected of Free TV channels to set up their own channel over the internet as others are well gearing up for this. Me for one will use Internet TV if that will be free (for Free Channels) but won’t even pay a dime for Pay Channels since I do have it on cable. Kill the cable first before expecting users to pay for Internet TV.

   
   
   

   Posted by: Steve Jobs |
   September 30, 2010 8:46 AM

   
   
















7. 
   
   
   

   If there is a labeled group that I must fall into then I would be a 'Cable cutter/never'. oh well, like politics two groups do not define the nation's opinion.
   
   I have been cable free for years. Lost the privilege one year and the spell was broken. I watched what I could get/receive from the roof antenna. Then the internet was suddenly quite a resource as I discovered people uploaded their season long DVR recordings and shared to many public sites. These hard to find sites called for registration or a number of uploads to contribute.
   
   Further research found major television companies sharing episodes and highlight reels. Then I heard about a young Hulu.com from a programmer friend who built a major tv site's app and then the Hulu.com app. Nice. This was free with registration and you could setup subscriptions and just scan your queue for what's new.
   
   Another great value is in sites like CastTv.com where we have a resource of shows found all over the web and they simply link you to the sites with the episodes. No fee. They even monitor when a program reaches the end of a season and goes to DVD or the producer earmarks an episode(Ex: Star Wars The Clone Wars to a paid format only).
   
   The tv community is on the move to the web and more will follow as Cable tries to compensate with fees and threatens stations with new contracts. Then we have companies supporting the community with $150 Blue Ray players and $99 Apple Tv that are pushing those internet shows to the front room television directly from your computer. We can get it all in HD quality on youtube, International tv stations, netflix, news shows and old tv series (VHS recordings salvaged and uploaded) that have been forgotten. All of this uploaded and available for the international viewing audience.

   
   
   

    Posted by: Eric |
   September 30, 2010 12:43 PM

   
   
















8. 
   
   
   

   this concept is going to rule the future generation TV.

   
   
   

   Posted by: san diego zoo |
   October 3, 2010 12:38 PM

   
   


























Remember the old days of dialler Trojan horses?




Back when most of us didn't have broadband at home, and connected to the internet via a modem, we saw a type of malware which could take advantage of the phone line plugged into the back of your PC and dial an expensive premium rate number.




In this way, criminal hackers could make money out of your infected computer - and you might know anything about it until you received an expensive telephone bill.




Dialler Trojan horses went the way of the dinosaur as consumers turned their back on modem connections and adopted broadband en masse.




But, as F-Secure's Mikko Hypponen explained today at the Virus Bulletin conference, the threat may have returned in a different form through the use of virtual premium rate numbers.






Earlier this year I described the Terdial Trojan horse, which was distributed posing as a Windows mobile game called "3D Anti-terrorist action", but appeared to make calls to Antarctica, Dominican Republic, Somalia and Sao Tome and Principe without the owner's permission.




So how did it make money for the hackers?




Well, it transpires that although the Trojan did make phone calls to numbers associated with various far-flung corners of the world, the calls never made it that far.




That's because the phone numbers were what are known as virtual numbers. It's perfectly possible to find telephone operators on the web who will rent you premium phone number associated with, say, Antarctica, and pay you every time that a call is made.




Unlike other legitimate premium rate numbers (such as 1-900 in USA), there is no regulation preventing abuse of the virtual numbers, and the 'owner' of the number gets paid instantly rather than having to wait 30 days.




And your call never actually gets as far as Antarctica or North Korea. It's stopped in your own country, but you're still billed as though you rang that far away place.




The days of Trojan horses making money out of dial-up modem connections may be long gone, but here's a model for money-making that mobile malware authors could certainly exploit.





BillBoard - Blogs - The Buffalo <b>News</b>

Buffalo Bills cornerback Terrence McGee had minor surgery Saturday to repair a pinched nerve affecting his left leg, an NFL source told the Buffalo News. The procedure was successful, but it could sideline McGee for up to four weeks. ...

Monday&#39;s <b>news</b>: Saturday&#39;s opener can&#39;t get here soon enough! - On <b>...</b>

At long last, we've got some honest-to-goodness competitive NHL hockey to look forward to this week as the 2010-11 season opens Thursday evening.

The Birmingham <b>News</b> Pink Edition: Supporting the fight against <b>...</b>

Reports on the work being done in our community to fight the disease and sharing the stories of breast cancer survivors.


eric seiger eric seiger



Comments




Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts









1. 
   
   
   

   I have been following the emergence and ultimate convergence of Internet and TV. The real crux will be content ownership and some sites made deals a year ago to produce shows for them. The ultimate switch will be similar to when the traditional networks lost eyes to cable channels. One misconception IMHO is this over 30 under 30 idea. Using age to demonstrate adaption trends is short sighted and frankly offensive. It puts into the social consciousness a sort of age bias that those over "40" already struggle with. It reminds me of an earlier decade belief in not trusting someone over 30. Not good relationship management.

   
   
   

   Posted by: Judith Copeland |
   September 29, 2010 9:02 PM

   
   
















2. 
   
   
   

   the problem with clicker is everyone already knows where to get the legal main content. Theres not too many places you can get ABC , FOX, NBC .. etc. They aren't solving a real problem. The real problem is finding all the places that I can find it outside of those channels if you know what I mean.

   
   
   

   Posted by: guest |
   September 29, 2010 9:55 PM

   
   
















3. 
   
   
   

   Google TV has the opportunity to be a transformative milestone in the realization of TV convergence. Google’s Android platform in every user’s home will be open to developers, including Clicker, to run apps that will be able to engage viewers in unprecedented manners. Leaned-back couch potatoes will be offered opportunities to lean-forward and curate their converged media, share, learn take actions.

   
   
   

   Closed captioning of both broadcast & online video will be a significant basis for converged TV experiences. Congress has passed, and the President will soon sign, directives to the FCC to have U.S. commercial broadcasters include these time-coded transcripts in all broadcast video content offered online. These metadata can be used by semantic engines to derive highly granular dynamic understanding of the content and better present viewers with powerful recommendations.
   
   

   
   
   

    Posted by: R Macdonald |
   September 29, 2010 9:59 PM

   
   
















4. 
   
   
   

   Well if Google starts working on it, there's a little chance for other companies unless they can come up with a real innovation and withstand the temptation of selling it out to google. As for online TV, I really hope that they find a smart compromise between producers protecting their content and users wanting it all for free.

   
   
   

   Posted by: essay_writing |
   September 30, 2010 1:45 AM

   
   
















5. 
   
   
   

   The switch from TV over the internet was always going to happen. It will be interesting to see how many peple embrace this change!

   
   
   

    Posted by: Dom |
   September 30, 2010 2:01 AM

   
   
















6. 
   
   
   

   It is expected of Free TV channels to set up their own channel over the internet as others are well gearing up for this. Me for one will use Internet TV if that will be free (for Free Channels) but won’t even pay a dime for Pay Channels since I do have it on cable. Kill the cable first before expecting users to pay for Internet TV.

   
   
   

   Posted by: Steve Jobs |
   September 30, 2010 8:46 AM

   
   
















7. 
   
   
   

   If there is a labeled group that I must fall into then I would be a 'Cable cutter/never'. oh well, like politics two groups do not define the nation's opinion.
   
   I have been cable free for years. Lost the privilege one year and the spell was broken. I watched what I could get/receive from the roof antenna. Then the internet was suddenly quite a resource as I discovered people uploaded their season long DVR recordings and shared to many public sites. These hard to find sites called for registration or a number of uploads to contribute.
   
   Further research found major television companies sharing episodes and highlight reels. Then I heard about a young Hulu.com from a programmer friend who built a major tv site's app and then the Hulu.com app. Nice. This was free with registration and you could setup subscriptions and just scan your queue for what's new.
   
   Another great value is in sites like CastTv.com where we have a resource of shows found all over the web and they simply link you to the sites with the episodes. No fee. They even monitor when a program reaches the end of a season and goes to DVD or the producer earmarks an episode(Ex: Star Wars The Clone Wars to a paid format only).
   
   The tv community is on the move to the web and more will follow as Cable tries to compensate with fees and threatens stations with new contracts. Then we have companies supporting the community with $150 Blue Ray players and $99 Apple Tv that are pushing those internet shows to the front room television directly from your computer. We can get it all in HD quality on youtube, International tv stations, netflix, news shows and old tv series (VHS recordings salvaged and uploaded) that have been forgotten. All of this uploaded and available for the international viewing audience.

   
   
   

    Posted by: Eric |
   September 30, 2010 12:43 PM

   
   
















8. 
   
   
   

   this concept is going to rule the future generation TV.

   
   
   

   Posted by: san diego zoo |
   October 3, 2010 12:38 PM

   
   


























Remember the old days of dialler Trojan horses?




Back when most of us didn't have broadband at home, and connected to the internet via a modem, we saw a type of malware which could take advantage of the phone line plugged into the back of your PC and dial an expensive premium rate number.




In this way, criminal hackers could make money out of your infected computer - and you might know anything about it until you received an expensive telephone bill.




Dialler Trojan horses went the way of the dinosaur as consumers turned their back on modem connections and adopted broadband en masse.




But, as F-Secure's Mikko Hypponen explained today at the Virus Bulletin conference, the threat may have returned in a different form through the use of virtual premium rate numbers.






Earlier this year I described the Terdial Trojan horse, which was distributed posing as a Windows mobile game called "3D Anti-terrorist action", but appeared to make calls to Antarctica, Dominican Republic, Somalia and Sao Tome and Principe without the owner's permission.




So how did it make money for the hackers?




Well, it transpires that although the Trojan did make phone calls to numbers associated with various far-flung corners of the world, the calls never made it that far.




That's because the phone numbers were what are known as virtual numbers. It's perfectly possible to find telephone operators on the web who will rent you premium phone number associated with, say, Antarctica, and pay you every time that a call is made.




Unlike other legitimate premium rate numbers (such as 1-900 in USA), there is no regulation preventing abuse of the virtual numbers, and the 'owner' of the number gets paid instantly rather than having to wait 30 days.




And your call never actually gets as far as Antarctica or North Korea. It's stopped in your own country, but you're still billed as though you rang that far away place.




The days of Trojan horses making money out of dial-up modem connections may be long gone, but here's a model for money-making that mobile malware authors could certainly exploit.





BillBoard - Blogs - The Buffalo <b>News</b>

Buffalo Bills cornerback Terrence McGee had minor surgery Saturday to repair a pinched nerve affecting his left leg, an NFL source told the Buffalo News. The procedure was successful, but it could sideline McGee for up to four weeks. ...

Monday&#39;s <b>news</b>: Saturday&#39;s opener can&#39;t get here soon enough! - On <b>...</b>

At long last, we've got some honest-to-goodness competitive NHL hockey to look forward to this week as the 2010-11 season opens Thursday evening.

The Birmingham <b>News</b> Pink Edition: Supporting the fight against <b>...</b>

Reports on the work being done in our community to fight the disease and sharing the stories of breast cancer survivors.


eric seiger eric seiger

Business Making Money

One of the big problems during the financial crisis was a bank run in the shadow banking system when doubts emerged about the safety of deposits.

In my last column at the Fiscal Times, I talked about an approach to solving the problem that involves having deposits in the shadow system backed (insured) by high quality collateral.

But high quality collateral is not the only option. Another way to do this is through a type of insurance along the lines of what the FDIC does for the traditional banking system, along with restrictions on eligibility for the insurance. In reaction to my column, and in support of the insurance approach, Morgan Ricks of Harvard Law School emails:

I enjoyed your Fiscal Times piece and am glad you're focused on this issue.

I'm a big admirer of Gary and Andrew's work, but I would encourage you to give some more thought to whether collateral requirements for repo are likely to do the trick. Here are a few things to consider:

• Many of the short-term liabilities of the shadow banking system were and are uncollateralized (think about Lehman's reliance on unsecured commercial paper -- the default of which caused the Reserve Fund to "break the buck," igniting the run on money market funds; and Citigroup's SIVs, which financed themselves in the unsecured markets).


• Money market investors do not want to take possession of collateral and dispose of it. Even if the collateral is high quality, they don't want the interest rate risk. That's not their business. They don't want to deal with the consequences of a counterparty default. This is why, in the crisis, many money market investors stopped rolling even those repos that were fully secured by Treasuries and agencies:
  
  
  
  • See Chris Cox's testimony on Bear Stearns (here http://www.sec.gov/news/testimony/2008/ts040308cc.htm): "For the first time, a major investment bank that was well-capitalized and apparently fully liquid experienced a crisis of confidence that denied it not only unsecured financing, but short-term secured financing, even when the collateral consisted of agency securities with a market value in excess of the funds to be borrowed"
  
  
  • See also FRBNY's repo task force report (here http://www.newyorkfed.org/prc/report_100517.pdf): “Discussions in the Task Force emphasized repeatedly that many Cash Investors focus primarily if not almost exclusively on counterparty concerns and that they will withdraw secured funding on the same or very similar timeframes as they would withdraw unsecured funding.”
  
  
  
  


• Even if collateral requirements reduce the likelihood of runs, how do we calibrate them -- what is the objective function? Presumably we think maturity transformation (fractional reserve banking) is a good thing -- it increases the supply of loanable funds by pooling otherwise idle cash reserves and deploying them toward productive investments. Risk constraints (such as collateral requirements) necessarily reduce this surplus -- there is a real social cost. How do we appraise the corresponding benefit? That is, how do we estimate the systemic instability associated with any given level of collateral requirements? My argument is that we can't. And by "we" I mean not just the government, but anybody.

My paper argues that we avoid these problems with an insurance regime; that financial firms outside the insurance regime should be disallowed from conducting maturity transformation (i.e., they would have to rely on term funding, not money market funding); and that we should develop functional criteria of eligibility for the insurance regime. (By the way, this is not the same thing as "extending" insurance to shadow banks.)

Anyway, these are things worth thinking about. I think the insurance approach needs more serious consideration than it has received -- it's a little lonely over here ...

Best,

Morgan Ricks

See here for nice summary of this approach and link to the underlying academic paper.

Yet Another Study Shows Musicians Making More Money

from the well,-look-at-that dept

We've made the argument repeatedly that saying unauthorized file sharing is hurting the music business lacks evidence. Instead, what we've seen, over and over again, is that more money is pouring into the music business, more music is being produced and (most importantly) that more musicians who embrace this new world are doing better than they would have otherwise. Now, we've pointed to research in the UK, Sweden and the US that have all shown aggregate growth for the music business, with some of the numbers suggesting more money going directly to musicians, rather than gatekeepers.



The latest study, highlighted by TorrentFreak takes a similar look at the Norwegian music market to show very similar findings and (of course) that musicians are, indeed, benefiting:



Like the UK and Swedish studies, this study, covering Norway, found that the aggregate amount going to the industry is up slightly (4% in real terms), mostly thanks to live shows more than making up for the decline in music sales (it's important to note that these researchers appear to have modeled their research on both the UK and Swedish studies, and made only slight changes, which they explain (and justify) in the report. The key finding is that musicians appear to be making significantly more these days than in the past:

Total artist revenues have gone from NOK 208 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, which is an increase of about 162%. Excluding state subsidization, the income from 1999 to 2009 has increased with NOK 229 million, or 147%....



According to this, Norwegian artists have seen an increase in all four of their income sources during the past eleven years. This goes contrary to the common belief that artists have seen a decline in income because of the digitalization of the industry.



The loss of record sales because of consequences of the digitalization of the industry has not affected the Norwegian artists in the same brutal way as it has the record companies. Artists earn in general 20% or less from record sales, and a decrease in record sales would most likely be compensated by an increase in one or more of the other three income sources.

Now, it's worth pointing out -- as I learned when I attended Nordic Music Week last year -- that the Norwegian music industry is heavily subsidized by the government, which is one of the four revenue streams discussed above. However, that only represents about 30% of artist revenue in 2009. The largest single component -- again similar to what we've seen elsewhere -- is live revenue, which continues to grow. Even if you exclude state subsidies, the report found that Norwegian artists doubled their income in the past 11 years:

Adjusted for inflation, total artist revenue has gone from NOK 255 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, an increase of about NOK 290 million or 114%. Excluding state subsidizations, the increase has changed from NOK 192 million to NOK 386 million, which is an increase of NOK 194 million or 101% This goes to show that the artists themselves, as a group, have seen tremendous more growth than the industry as a whole.

And, yes, there are more musicians out there to split the pie, but the growth rate in the industry has increased more quickly than the growth in musicians.

Since the total number of artists in 1999 and 2009 are available to the authors, it is possible to calculate an average income from music for artists in Norway. With 3200 artists in 1999 the average income from music would be about NOK 65 000. With 4100 artists in 2009 the average income from music is about NOK 133 000, creating an increase of NOK 68 000 or 105%. Adjusted for inflation the income has increased with from about NOK 80 000 to NOK 133 000, an increase of NOK 53 000, an increase of 66%.

Overall, the results, like those in Sweden and the UK, seem to clearly debunk the repeated claims from recording industry folks (and some musicians) that artists are somehow suffering under this new setup. Now, there may absolutely be cases where artists who fail to adapt are struggling, and there's no doubt that some labels that failed to adapt are struggling -- but there's increasingly little evidence that the overall music industry or artists as a whole are suffering. All of the evidence seems to suggest that it's not file sharing that's a problem at all. More money is going into the music business. The only problems are from those in the industry too stubborn or too clueless to adapt to capture the money that's flowing in.

27 Comments | Leave a Comment..

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Tony Hawk: Shred dated <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Activision's launched an interactive website "that gives players a head start on honing their over-the-top skate and snowboarding skills as they explore new game content, the latest news and much, much more!" Check it out here. ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

bench craft company rip off
bench craft company rip off

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Tony Hawk: Shred dated <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Activision's launched an interactive website "that gives players a head start on honing their over-the-top skate and snowboarding skills as they explore new game content, the latest news and much, much more!" Check it out here. ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off

One of the big problems during the financial crisis was a bank run in the shadow banking system when doubts emerged about the safety of deposits.

In my last column at the Fiscal Times, I talked about an approach to solving the problem that involves having deposits in the shadow system backed (insured) by high quality collateral.

But high quality collateral is not the only option. Another way to do this is through a type of insurance along the lines of what the FDIC does for the traditional banking system, along with restrictions on eligibility for the insurance. In reaction to my column, and in support of the insurance approach, Morgan Ricks of Harvard Law School emails:

I enjoyed your Fiscal Times piece and am glad you're focused on this issue.

I'm a big admirer of Gary and Andrew's work, but I would encourage you to give some more thought to whether collateral requirements for repo are likely to do the trick. Here are a few things to consider:

• Many of the short-term liabilities of the shadow banking system were and are uncollateralized (think about Lehman's reliance on unsecured commercial paper -- the default of which caused the Reserve Fund to "break the buck," igniting the run on money market funds; and Citigroup's SIVs, which financed themselves in the unsecured markets).


• Money market investors do not want to take possession of collateral and dispose of it. Even if the collateral is high quality, they don't want the interest rate risk. That's not their business. They don't want to deal with the consequences of a counterparty default. This is why, in the crisis, many money market investors stopped rolling even those repos that were fully secured by Treasuries and agencies:
  
  
  
  • See Chris Cox's testimony on Bear Stearns (here http://www.sec.gov/news/testimony/2008/ts040308cc.htm): "For the first time, a major investment bank that was well-capitalized and apparently fully liquid experienced a crisis of confidence that denied it not only unsecured financing, but short-term secured financing, even when the collateral consisted of agency securities with a market value in excess of the funds to be borrowed"
  
  
  • See also FRBNY's repo task force report (here http://www.newyorkfed.org/prc/report_100517.pdf): “Discussions in the Task Force emphasized repeatedly that many Cash Investors focus primarily if not almost exclusively on counterparty concerns and that they will withdraw secured funding on the same or very similar timeframes as they would withdraw unsecured funding.”
  
  
  
  


• Even if collateral requirements reduce the likelihood of runs, how do we calibrate them -- what is the objective function? Presumably we think maturity transformation (fractional reserve banking) is a good thing -- it increases the supply of loanable funds by pooling otherwise idle cash reserves and deploying them toward productive investments. Risk constraints (such as collateral requirements) necessarily reduce this surplus -- there is a real social cost. How do we appraise the corresponding benefit? That is, how do we estimate the systemic instability associated with any given level of collateral requirements? My argument is that we can't. And by "we" I mean not just the government, but anybody.

My paper argues that we avoid these problems with an insurance regime; that financial firms outside the insurance regime should be disallowed from conducting maturity transformation (i.e., they would have to rely on term funding, not money market funding); and that we should develop functional criteria of eligibility for the insurance regime. (By the way, this is not the same thing as "extending" insurance to shadow banks.)

Anyway, these are things worth thinking about. I think the insurance approach needs more serious consideration than it has received -- it's a little lonely over here ...

Best,

Morgan Ricks

See here for nice summary of this approach and link to the underlying academic paper.

Yet Another Study Shows Musicians Making More Money

from the well,-look-at-that dept

We've made the argument repeatedly that saying unauthorized file sharing is hurting the music business lacks evidence. Instead, what we've seen, over and over again, is that more money is pouring into the music business, more music is being produced and (most importantly) that more musicians who embrace this new world are doing better than they would have otherwise. Now, we've pointed to research in the UK, Sweden and the US that have all shown aggregate growth for the music business, with some of the numbers suggesting more money going directly to musicians, rather than gatekeepers.



The latest study, highlighted by TorrentFreak takes a similar look at the Norwegian music market to show very similar findings and (of course) that musicians are, indeed, benefiting:



Like the UK and Swedish studies, this study, covering Norway, found that the aggregate amount going to the industry is up slightly (4% in real terms), mostly thanks to live shows more than making up for the decline in music sales (it's important to note that these researchers appear to have modeled their research on both the UK and Swedish studies, and made only slight changes, which they explain (and justify) in the report. The key finding is that musicians appear to be making significantly more these days than in the past:

Total artist revenues have gone from NOK 208 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, which is an increase of about 162%. Excluding state subsidization, the income from 1999 to 2009 has increased with NOK 229 million, or 147%....



According to this, Norwegian artists have seen an increase in all four of their income sources during the past eleven years. This goes contrary to the common belief that artists have seen a decline in income because of the digitalization of the industry.



The loss of record sales because of consequences of the digitalization of the industry has not affected the Norwegian artists in the same brutal way as it has the record companies. Artists earn in general 20% or less from record sales, and a decrease in record sales would most likely be compensated by an increase in one or more of the other three income sources.

Now, it's worth pointing out -- as I learned when I attended Nordic Music Week last year -- that the Norwegian music industry is heavily subsidized by the government, which is one of the four revenue streams discussed above. However, that only represents about 30% of artist revenue in 2009. The largest single component -- again similar to what we've seen elsewhere -- is live revenue, which continues to grow. Even if you exclude state subsidies, the report found that Norwegian artists doubled their income in the past 11 years:

Adjusted for inflation, total artist revenue has gone from NOK 255 million in 1999 to NOK 545 million in 2009, an increase of about NOK 290 million or 114%. Excluding state subsidizations, the increase has changed from NOK 192 million to NOK 386 million, which is an increase of NOK 194 million or 101% This goes to show that the artists themselves, as a group, have seen tremendous more growth than the industry as a whole.

And, yes, there are more musicians out there to split the pie, but the growth rate in the industry has increased more quickly than the growth in musicians.

Since the total number of artists in 1999 and 2009 are available to the authors, it is possible to calculate an average income from music for artists in Norway. With 3200 artists in 1999 the average income from music would be about NOK 65 000. With 4100 artists in 2009 the average income from music is about NOK 133 000, creating an increase of NOK 68 000 or 105%. Adjusted for inflation the income has increased with from about NOK 80 000 to NOK 133 000, an increase of NOK 53 000, an increase of 66%.

Overall, the results, like those in Sweden and the UK, seem to clearly debunk the repeated claims from recording industry folks (and some musicians) that artists are somehow suffering under this new setup. Now, there may absolutely be cases where artists who fail to adapt are struggling, and there's no doubt that some labels that failed to adapt are struggling -- but there's increasingly little evidence that the overall music industry or artists as a whole are suffering. All of the evidence seems to suggest that it's not file sharing that's a problem at all. More money is going into the music business. The only problems are from those in the industry too stubborn or too clueless to adapt to capture the money that's flowing in.

27 Comments | Leave a Comment..

bench craft company rip off

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Tony Hawk: Shred dated <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Activision's launched an interactive website "that gives players a head start on honing their over-the-top skate and snowboarding skills as they explore new game content, the latest news and much, much more!" Check it out here. ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Tony Hawk: Shred dated <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Activision's launched an interactive website "that gives players a head start on honing their over-the-top skate and snowboarding skills as they explore new game content, the latest news and much, much more!" Check it out here. ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Tony Hawk: Shred dated <b>News</b> - Page 1 | Eurogamer.net

Activision's launched an interactive website "that gives players a head start on honing their over-the-top skate and snowboarding skills as they explore new game content, the latest news and much, much more!" Check it out here. ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off

Affiliate Making Money

If you are a restaurant owner, then special discounts and coupon deals could attract a lot of attention and customers to your business. But such deals are almost always risky. Unless a good number of people show up to take advantage of the deal, you might end up loosing instead of gaining.

The online service, Aumio, helps to make sure your deals do not end being counterproductive.

Aumio is a free to use web service that helps you promote your deals. The deal need not be restricted to restaurants – it can be anything. You need to enter your deal’s name, web link, an optional coupon code and an expiration time limit for the deal. You can also set a minimum number of shares before the deal is unlocked i.e. before the deal becomes valid.

Once you enter all the information, you are given a unique URL that can be used to promote your deal.

Along with the sharing URL, you will also get a statistics URL that you can use to monitor the page views.

People can share your page through Facebook and Twitter. Once it has been shared the number of times you previously specified, the deal becomes valid thereby ensuring you do not suffer a loss from it.

Features:

• A user friendly website.
• Lets you create a page to promote any deal.
• Visitors to your deal’s page can share it on Facebook and Twitter.
• You are given a URL through which you can view your deal’s page’s web statistics.
• Lets you optionally setup a minimum number of shares before the deal becomes valid.
• Similar tools: BigCrumbs, FatWallet, Yahoo Deals, RatherBeShopping and Groupon.
• Also read related articles: 3 Sites To Discover Hot Deals Recommended By Other Users Like You, 5 Online Shopping Sites That Will Actually SAVE You Money and 5 Online Sources For Amazon Promotional Codes.

Check out Aumio @ www.aumio.com (by MOin from ThumbPress)

Citing massive irregularities and gross taxpayer funding abuses, federal investigators are recommending that government funding for ACORN’s still operating housing affiliate be cut off immediately.

Investigators must have felt it was necessary to urge the funding cutoff because the federal government’s prohibition on funding ACORN isn’t a permanent ban. It exists at the whim of lawmakers and runs out at the end of this month. This is the finding of an analysis by Capital Research Center (which has been tracking ACORN since 1998).

Investigators may also have wanted to remind the public that ACORN is still alive. Reports of ACORN’s demise continue to be churned out by misinformed journalists who  amplify the zombie group’s lies. In recent days the Washington Post incorrectly described ACORN as “a dead NGO,” and Slate said ACORN has “stopped existing.” More on this in a moment.

The Sept. 21 report from the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Inspector General found that ACORN Housing, which changed its name earlier this year to Affordable Housing Centers of America (AHC), may have concealed fraud by destroying or failing to produce records.

ACORN violated federal rules on how grants are to be used. The group charged the government salary costs for employees after they were terminated, the report said, and violated federal procurement standards.

The report suggested ACORN corruptly funneled taxpayer dollars to its affiliates and engaged in money laundering. ACORN has taken in more than $19 million in housing counseling grants since 1995 from HUD. NeighborWorks, a congressionally chartered nonprofit, gave ACORN $25.9 million. ACORN Housing has received more than $27.3 million from other federal and non-federal sources, the report said.

The report urged HUD to force ACORN Housing to improve its record-keeping and recommended the ACORN affiliate be placed on “inactive” status while it “initiates corrective actions to address the exceptions and recommendations in this report.”

“Any organization that applies for and accepts taxpayer dollars has a responsibility to act consistently with federal law,” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.). “It doesn’t matter if it’s ten dollars or ten thousand dollars, there is no acceptable amount of abuse or mismanagement that the federal government should tolerate when it comes to the taxpayer’s dollars.”

Issa is ranking minority member on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He is expected to become chairman if Republicans win control of the House in November.

Many Americans –and some lawmakers— seem to believe Congress cut off ACORN permanently, but this belief appears to be unfounded.

This confusion about ACORN can probably be blamed in part on the quirks of parliamentary procedure and the complexity of the appropriations process. The legal language prohibiting the funding is contained in spending legislation that covers only the federal government’s current fiscal year which ends this Sept. 30. The House and the Senate first passed legislation banning funding for ACORN in fall 2009 after undercover videos showed ACORN Housing employees offering activists James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles “how to” advice on establishing a brothel, defrauding the government and banks, and evading other laws.

Mass media news reports rarely explain details of spending bills, such as when the fiscal year they cover comes to an end. But the fact that the funding ban is not permanent was noticed by ACORN lawyers and Judge Roger J. Miner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Miner wrote the court’s opinion in August that overturned Judge Nina Gershon’s perverse ruling that the funding ban was an unconstitutional “bill of attainder” that punished ACORN without a trial.

Public Law 111-68, signed by President Obama on Oct. 1, 2009, is formally known as “An Act making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.” [emphasis added] Section 163 of the Act reads: “None of the funds made available by this joint resolution or any prior Act may be provided to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, or allied organizations.”

Similar de-funding language was included in other spending bills signed into law by President Obama that followed in the weeks after. All those bills covered federal spending only for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2010. (See Section 427 of Public Law 111-88; Division A – Section 418, Division B – Section 534, and Division E – Section 511 of Public Law 111-117; Section 8124 of Public Law 111-118.)

Plans to extend the funding ban are in the works in Congress. Section 417 of the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill for fiscal 2011 (S.3644) would prohibit funding of ACORN in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, 2010. It’s very unlikely that the bill will become law by Oct. 1 but Congress may also extend the funding ban in new stopgap spending legislation – though there’s no guarantee that will happen.

Then there’s lazy reporting that may have also added to public confusion.

Most reporters uncritically accepted ACORN’s false claim to have shut down earlier this year despite abundant evidence to the contrary. ACORN said it dissolved its national structure on April Fool’s Day, yet the group continues to operate out of its headquarters in Brooklyn. Two weeks after the alleged shutdown Chief Organizer Bertha Lewis sent out a fundraising letter boasting that “ACORN is alive because you are alive and still fighting for justice.” Lawyer Arthur Z. Schwartz is still representing ACORN. He sent a letter June 9 to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) demanding changes to a report on his client.

Both ACORN operative Nathan Henderson-James and ACORN hagiographer John Atlas have admitted the shuttering of the ACORN network is a sham. Issa’s investigators also reported that Lewis has been busy consolidating and hoarding ACORN’s assets. ACORN reportedly has $10 million in property and $20 million in cash in 800 bank accounts. Like grifters who adopt new aliases in order to keep duping victims, ACORN chapters in 13 states and the District of Columbia have incorporated themselves under new names. Many of the “new” re-branded groups have the same employees and board members and addresses as the old ACORN chapters.

That’s a lot of activity for a group that’s dead.

Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 10/1 - Arrowhead Pride

Good morning, AP. Another day, another post full of Kansas City Chiefs news. The stories died down a bit today. Most stories are now focused on this weekend's games. There are a couple of good ones, though. Be sure to check them out.

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

<b>News</b> Roundup: &#39;Jersey Shore&#39; Under Fire in Canada, Bret Michaels <b>...</b>

It seems not everybody is DTW (down to watch) the 'Jersey Shore' cast work on their GTL. The macaroni rascals are under fire up North for.

eric seiger skin and vein center

If you are a restaurant owner, then special discounts and coupon deals could attract a lot of attention and customers to your business. But such deals are almost always risky. Unless a good number of people show up to take advantage of the deal, you might end up loosing instead of gaining.

The online service, Aumio, helps to make sure your deals do not end being counterproductive.

Aumio is a free to use web service that helps you promote your deals. The deal need not be restricted to restaurants – it can be anything. You need to enter your deal’s name, web link, an optional coupon code and an expiration time limit for the deal. You can also set a minimum number of shares before the deal is unlocked i.e. before the deal becomes valid.

Once you enter all the information, you are given a unique URL that can be used to promote your deal.

Along with the sharing URL, you will also get a statistics URL that you can use to monitor the page views.

People can share your page through Facebook and Twitter. Once it has been shared the number of times you previously specified, the deal becomes valid thereby ensuring you do not suffer a loss from it.

Features:

• A user friendly website.
• Lets you create a page to promote any deal.
• Visitors to your deal’s page can share it on Facebook and Twitter.
• You are given a URL through which you can view your deal’s page’s web statistics.
• Lets you optionally setup a minimum number of shares before the deal becomes valid.
• Similar tools: BigCrumbs, FatWallet, Yahoo Deals, RatherBeShopping and Groupon.
• Also read related articles: 3 Sites To Discover Hot Deals Recommended By Other Users Like You, 5 Online Shopping Sites That Will Actually SAVE You Money and 5 Online Sources For Amazon Promotional Codes.

Check out Aumio @ www.aumio.com (by MOin from ThumbPress)

Citing massive irregularities and gross taxpayer funding abuses, federal investigators are recommending that government funding for ACORN’s still operating housing affiliate be cut off immediately.

Investigators must have felt it was necessary to urge the funding cutoff because the federal government’s prohibition on funding ACORN isn’t a permanent ban. It exists at the whim of lawmakers and runs out at the end of this month. This is the finding of an analysis by Capital Research Center (which has been tracking ACORN since 1998).

Investigators may also have wanted to remind the public that ACORN is still alive. Reports of ACORN’s demise continue to be churned out by misinformed journalists who  amplify the zombie group’s lies. In recent days the Washington Post incorrectly described ACORN as “a dead NGO,” and Slate said ACORN has “stopped existing.” More on this in a moment.

The Sept. 21 report from the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Inspector General found that ACORN Housing, which changed its name earlier this year to Affordable Housing Centers of America (AHC), may have concealed fraud by destroying or failing to produce records.

ACORN violated federal rules on how grants are to be used. The group charged the government salary costs for employees after they were terminated, the report said, and violated federal procurement standards.

The report suggested ACORN corruptly funneled taxpayer dollars to its affiliates and engaged in money laundering. ACORN has taken in more than $19 million in housing counseling grants since 1995 from HUD. NeighborWorks, a congressionally chartered nonprofit, gave ACORN $25.9 million. ACORN Housing has received more than $27.3 million from other federal and non-federal sources, the report said.

The report urged HUD to force ACORN Housing to improve its record-keeping and recommended the ACORN affiliate be placed on “inactive” status while it “initiates corrective actions to address the exceptions and recommendations in this report.”

“Any organization that applies for and accepts taxpayer dollars has a responsibility to act consistently with federal law,” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.). “It doesn’t matter if it’s ten dollars or ten thousand dollars, there is no acceptable amount of abuse or mismanagement that the federal government should tolerate when it comes to the taxpayer’s dollars.”

Issa is ranking minority member on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He is expected to become chairman if Republicans win control of the House in November.

Many Americans –and some lawmakers— seem to believe Congress cut off ACORN permanently, but this belief appears to be unfounded.

This confusion about ACORN can probably be blamed in part on the quirks of parliamentary procedure and the complexity of the appropriations process. The legal language prohibiting the funding is contained in spending legislation that covers only the federal government’s current fiscal year which ends this Sept. 30. The House and the Senate first passed legislation banning funding for ACORN in fall 2009 after undercover videos showed ACORN Housing employees offering activists James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles “how to” advice on establishing a brothel, defrauding the government and banks, and evading other laws.

Mass media news reports rarely explain details of spending bills, such as when the fiscal year they cover comes to an end. But the fact that the funding ban is not permanent was noticed by ACORN lawyers and Judge Roger J. Miner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Miner wrote the court’s opinion in August that overturned Judge Nina Gershon’s perverse ruling that the funding ban was an unconstitutional “bill of attainder” that punished ACORN without a trial.

Public Law 111-68, signed by President Obama on Oct. 1, 2009, is formally known as “An Act making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.” [emphasis added] Section 163 of the Act reads: “None of the funds made available by this joint resolution or any prior Act may be provided to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, or allied organizations.”

Similar de-funding language was included in other spending bills signed into law by President Obama that followed in the weeks after. All those bills covered federal spending only for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2010. (See Section 427 of Public Law 111-88; Division A – Section 418, Division B – Section 534, and Division E – Section 511 of Public Law 111-117; Section 8124 of Public Law 111-118.)

Plans to extend the funding ban are in the works in Congress. Section 417 of the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill for fiscal 2011 (S.3644) would prohibit funding of ACORN in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, 2010. It’s very unlikely that the bill will become law by Oct. 1 but Congress may also extend the funding ban in new stopgap spending legislation – though there’s no guarantee that will happen.

Then there’s lazy reporting that may have also added to public confusion.

Most reporters uncritically accepted ACORN’s false claim to have shut down earlier this year despite abundant evidence to the contrary. ACORN said it dissolved its national structure on April Fool’s Day, yet the group continues to operate out of its headquarters in Brooklyn. Two weeks after the alleged shutdown Chief Organizer Bertha Lewis sent out a fundraising letter boasting that “ACORN is alive because you are alive and still fighting for justice.” Lawyer Arthur Z. Schwartz is still representing ACORN. He sent a letter June 9 to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) demanding changes to a report on his client.

Both ACORN operative Nathan Henderson-James and ACORN hagiographer John Atlas have admitted the shuttering of the ACORN network is a sham. Issa’s investigators also reported that Lewis has been busy consolidating and hoarding ACORN’s assets. ACORN reportedly has $10 million in property and $20 million in cash in 800 bank accounts. Like grifters who adopt new aliases in order to keep duping victims, ACORN chapters in 13 states and the District of Columbia have incorporated themselves under new names. Many of the “new” re-branded groups have the same employees and board members and addresses as the old ACORN chapters.

That’s a lot of activity for a group that’s dead.

Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 10/1 - Arrowhead Pride

Good morning, AP. Another day, another post full of Kansas City Chiefs news. The stories died down a bit today. Most stories are now focused on this weekend's games. There are a couple of good ones, though. Be sure to check them out.

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

<b>News</b> Roundup: &#39;Jersey Shore&#39; Under Fire in Canada, Bret Michaels <b>...</b>

It seems not everybody is DTW (down to watch) the 'Jersey Shore' cast work on their GTL. The macaroni rascals are under fire up North for.

eric seiger dermatology eric seiger dermatology