Too cheap?

It is not a statement, it is a question. I started to ask myself this when I had a deeper conversation with one of the people I actually trust. I have mentioned it here before that I have certain IP for sale. The parties are Google, Amazon, Huawei (Tencent) and I added Elon Musk (that man can turn good ideas to gold). The initial stage was that thee was an idea that allowed Google (Stadia) and Amazon (Luna) to sell in excess of 50,000,000 consoles. Yet it was a low estimate. I believe it to be well in excess of 75,000,000 consoles. In the mean time Netflix has entered the field and even as they have nothing to really bring to the table, it seems that these three are not to serious about their streamers, but somehow Tencent seemingly is? And that started the exploration conversation that my idea was too cheap. Was it? You see the second pay cycle gets me 10% of the IP and sales value, so the second payment would be massive and the first one left me without worries, so why ask for more? I am not a teenager with the dream to have lusty gorgeous 20 year old ladies doing a balancing act on mr John Thomas every day, well not anymore that was decades ago. 

I now look towards a relaxed retirement and whatever comes with that. As such I created three IP bundles which (after some serious travel) received the automated release date on September 30th on 4Chan. An encrypted solution that was innovative and something a player like the NSA could not counter on 4Chan, not with that amount of images. As such no computer I touch will ever go near it, I merely have to wait for a clever person to figure it out and once released it all becomes public domain, a stage no one can counter, no one can make claims at present as they played their own silly games. A stage where ONE title puts the streamers on par with the larger consoles, straight in a temporary second place and that is on my numbers. If the numbers increase (which has a decent chance of happening) that console will stay in second place with an option to get pole position.  A stage Sony NEVER faced before, and this is not against Sony, I love my Playstation (yes, I need help). 

So here I was trying to convince my friend the simple setting that enough is enough. Why go greed driven for numbers that are too weird to my universe? And of course that station is rejected because if everyone else is greed driven, I have to be greed driven too. Yet when greed overwhelms you, you forget the sight of things. I created 8 parts of IP, I got there by looking around, not by looking after greed and that was merely the starting stage. I understood but never accepted ‘Greed is good’ (Wall Street, the movie), although that sentiment lives strongly on Wall Street as well. Yet in my setting what have they missed so far? Over the last year I have shown all kinds of IP (some open and public), but these ideas should have been in the hands of BigTech. At least one of them at least a decade, but greed is limiting their view and I am showing others this again and again. Yet, for some reason they are not catching on. So whilst they slap each other on the back billions elude them. There is now a chance that the third IP bundle is gaining mass and therefor value, I still thought that 2.6 billion was a little high, and there are risks that I cannot foresee, but looking deeper some might state that my estimate is too low. Is it? If I end up with 5% of 2 billion I will not complain, but the IP is now estimated at 2.6 billion and will optionally be higher. So is the estimate too cheap, am I delusionally too cheap or is the truth of the matter somewhere else. The issue almost came to blow as I looked at the Twitter issues (yesterday) where some are ignoring what is out in the open, what else are they missing? It becomes a much larger station when players like Forbes give us ‘Local News Losing Billions In Revenue Each Year From Digital Media Giants’ (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradadgate/2021/05/17/local-news-losing-billions-in-revenue-each-year-from-digital-media/) where we see “Local TV news continues to be a trustworthy and primary source to millions of viewers. This connection with the community and trust has been important, never more so than during the pandemic when local TV news reported strong ratings growth (although with the economic slowdown ad revenue was sluggish).” It is the added “A recent research analysis from BIA Advisory Services and commissioned by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), entitled Economic Impact of Big Tech Platforms on the Viability of Local Broadcast News, reported that local TV newscasts lose an estimated $1.873 billion each year from Google Search and Facebook News Feeds.” It gave me the the following parts.

  1. What is local news? Honestly, the news tends to be Fox, CNN, BBC and a few others and they are global. More important they ALL trivialised the Twitter numbers.
  2. This gets us to number two. Trustworthy is merely an 11 letter word that has less and less value in media and in filtered information (news that is approved by media shareholders and stakeholders). 
  3. So who places news on Facebook? I placed images from several sources, they are not news items, they are deceptively placed forms of advertisers placed BY the media themselves. 

A setting that goes on and on, so what numbers if Forbes bitching about and more important. When we look at some research instigated by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) I feel certain that I will find a whole range of issues. Painting the street in the colour of preference has consequences, yet Forbes is not too hassled on that are they?

As such where we are given “Whereas, ad dollars for local television are projected to be flat in the years ahead, digital media are forecast for year-over-year percent double-digit gains in ad spend.” It was a greed driven setting where local advertise systems ruined the market on greed, and when Google launched a true fair system the people en mass moved there. After decades to be given a real number was overwhelmingly interesting to advertisers, and now they all cry foul, all destroyed by their own greed and the Twitter setting merely echoes that. So why would I join those losers? I might not end with anything, it might just become public domain, but if I won’t get it, the greed driven will not either and when it comes out in months and they all come with “I could have gotten you soooo much” I can reply, so why didn’t you? It is the defeating move to the greed driven, to see them end with nothing, the sweetest victory of all. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science, Stories

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.