Tag Archives: BBC

August 16, 2022 · 18:59

The old debate

The BBC is hitting us with another version of a debate that has been going on for a while. The article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-61594815) gives us ‘Report blasts “manipulative” video game loot boxes’, first off, they are not lying to you, this is not misrepresentation. In this, I do not completely agree with the point of view of some. The article gives us “The contents of the virtual boxes are only revealed through either game play or by making a payment. While some contain useful tools or desirable extras which improve the experience, others are worthless.” These facts are true. There are two sides here. In the first, why allow for payment? It is the right of a person to buy something, we set ourselves up for that one. Yet in all this, the people who paid 12,000 euro for boxes. No one is debating the utter stupidity of these people. No one is debating that as an adult YOU are responsible for your actions. But the press was all about those poor poor junkies, weren’t they? The other issue is “others are worthless”, what makes the card worthless? It is a direct question. What makes a card worthless? In the NHL game, there are functional cards (stadiums and players), there are cosmetic cards (outfits) and there are support cards, so what makes a card worthless? Then we get “The report authors, the Norwegian Consumer Council (NCC), say gamers are being “manipulated” into spending large sums of money on the chests.” I have an issue with that. Which games were they? How was there manipulation? The NHL game gave card packs on milestones, and there were a lot of milestones. In addition, you got three free packs a day, and if you connected to the game (logged in) often enough, you got enough markers (there is one in EVERY pack) to exchange those markers for an expanded pack, giving you 12 or even 20 cards. The packs also had a betting coin card. One per pack and these funds allowed you to bid for other cards. Within 3 months I had all the stadiums, all the NHL jerseys and hockey masks, as well as over 100 players. I NEVER spend a cent, this was all free. So please tell me “How was I manipulated into spending large sums of money?” There are always the stupid people who want it all on day one, is that the fault of the game maker? Is it THEIR responsibility for the stupidity of others? The next part of my disagreement is seen in “Critics say the boxes are a form of gambling because players cannot see what they have actually bought until after they have paid to open the contents”. In this it is important to see WHY I disagree. You see in CCG games like Magic, Star Trek, Star Wars, The lord of the rings and more we see that a pack has one rare (optionally one super rare), 2-3 uncommon cards and the rest are common. This is a set formula. So if a game set has 50 rare cards, you would be buying at the very least 50 packs. The optional rest is gotten through swapping with other players at events and at tournaments. It is NOT gambling because one element is missing. The element of gambling is that you lose everything, so until there is a pack where you get all blank cards stating “Thank You!”, it is NOT gambling. You always get a set equation, you always get something. It makes it not gambling. 

In this I oppose the setting of “Finn Myrstad, director of digital policy at the NCC, said: “The sale and presentation of loot boxes often involve exploiting consumers through predatory mechanisms, fostering addiction, targeting vulnerable consumer groups and more.”” Yet there is a sparkly of truth here too and I do not deny it. Players like Electronic Arts played the exploitative element too much in FIFA, it backfired. There is exploitation, especially when the complete pack contains 10,000 players. However I disagree with the ‘predatory mechanism’ part. There is a whole range of predators on YouTube with there ‘card reveal’ channel, there “Do this to get something for free” and that is never a good thing, but these groups did not separate the exploiters from the makers, did they? Lets be clear the makers are not freshly white innocent. Only the people from Mass Effect 3 who introduced these loot-boxes in their multi player element, they were phenomenal and massively innocent. Others used that stage to make big money. 

The article ends with “But the same year Fortnite-maker, Epic Games, decided to let players in its hit video game see what was inside its llama loot boxes before deciding whether to buy them.” And their case agains Apple gained traction. I believe that the Epic Games people are the lest innocent, and their setting will have long term repercussions, it is only a matter of time. The one element not seen was given to us by Android: Netrunner. They gave us a different setting making it fair all around, the expansions were all the same price and always had the same cards, so there was only one pack to buy (once a month). It allowed for a smoother and fair game stage. In addition, the CCG world has something called factory sets. They were slightly different (like a silver border) but that was the only difference. A factory set contained ALL the cards of a game. The game was instantly fully playable, but they do tend to come later. So EA had the option to release a factory set half way through the season, but they did not, did they? Is it on EA? That would be a fair question, and I do not know the answer, merely my feeling in this. Is there a larger exploitation? Yes, but not all of it is on the makers. YouTubers were all over their FIFA cards and the more bang the better their bucks and the numbers of their followers, but we do not see that here either.

The BBC (as well as Tom Gerken) never lie to you, yet I have issues with the article as I have issues with the setting of it. The players HAVE a responsibility and some are pushing it on EA (and others) and the media aided them, which is not fair either. All this is merely my point of view, so feel free to disagree.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

August 10, 2022 · 19:50

The jab from the left

That is the setting I was contemplating today. It all started with the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62488144) where I saw ‘Elon Musk sells $6.9bn of Tesla shares as Twitter lawsuit looms’ it was at that moment I was contemplating a larger jab from the left. Consider that I reckon that one of my IP will bring in half a billion a month. What if I offer that to Elon Musk? It is not his field, but that has never stopped him before. What if I was the on giving him optionally surpassing 5 billion a year (not in the first year) for some time to come? My way of giving the media the finger, as well as some tech places. We still see the BS from media ignoring the Fake Twitter accounts, we see some BS approach like ‘she cried, she cried louder and we wonder what happens’, well if it helps Elon Musk, I am game. There is also the augmented reality IP, as such there might be another stage where Elon Musk gets the visibility in 116,000 malls. I think it is a good day to give the finger to hypocrisy and the media with there digital dollars? They can watch from the stage as they become more and more redundant. Hmmm, the idea has merit, and if I can set the stage for places like the Line to show it all first we will see all these tech companies come up with “We are working on something much better” yes, like the virgin who is in denial that she was pregnant, a toilet seat must have done it. Well, two can play at that game and I have the IP to make it happen, as such I see a much larger option to have a go at these hypocrites. 35 years of frustration watching wankers and weaklings hide behind fake it until you make it, hide behind their bullet points, like it was the ammunition that could not miss sales targets. There is something totally satisfying watching them cry like the little chihuahua’s they actually are. Will it happen? I have no idea, I think not, I doubt Elon Musk even knows about this blog and he has more pressing concerns at present, but the idea to show the media that we have had enough of the BS they spout by giving billions in revenue to the man they hate, and for that reason only will upset big-tech in a way they have never seen before. 

There is nothing like the sight of a hungry glutton being denied their next meal to see chaos truly explode and that is what would happen. Never mind the Microsoft losers, places like Amazon and Google will take notice, for them having to acknowledge Elon Musk as their equal in mobiles, cars, battery technology AND gaming. That will have a much larger impact and the media will seek all kinds of shelter, crying that their was no place in their publication, crying that they never hd the know how, that it is all the right of publications to chose what to write about and if I can drive the dagger home with a few issues on the EEA and their ignored reports, so much the better. 

So whilst the BBC is not doing anything wrong with “After news of the share sale was made public Mr Musk responded to a tweet asking whether he had finished selling Tesla shares with “yes”, adding that he needed the money in case he was forced to buy Twitter and was unable to secure some of the funding for the deal.” Some might realise that the recent ‘confession’ that Twitter is deleting a million accounts a day and that adds up to a lot more than some are comfortable with. There is a larger station and I feel it is not the worst idea to scorch the media with a flamethrower (I had run out of daisies). 

The jab from the left is one the media is too often not ready for, they will ‘debate’ that there are compromises, all whilst we know that compromise politics is the most corrupt of all politics. And it is time that the proper people get the proper acknowledgement and we can get there by denying the other players their slice of cake. I’ll make it even more extreme. There is at present nothing stopping me to make it all public domain, and when the lists go public on September 30th that might very well happen. All it will take is 1-3 clever people who can look beyond the rim of their coffee cup (something most politicians have not been able to do for some time). Clever people on 4chan could end up with a treasure trove of IP on several grounds (apart from melting down Iranian and Russian nuclear reactors), that one I left somewhere else, I am not THAT irresponsible. And the idea I had came from a snow-globe, but I already wrote about that. 

Just in light of the setting of these days a solution for Iranian arrogance, through a snow-globe ending their nuclear reactors. How could I ever pass up on that? I reckon that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would owe me too and that is not the worst setting to be in, to be owed a large favour from the richest nation in the world. All that because the media would not do their jobs, how is that for freedom of the press and freedom of expression? I am using my freedom of expression the way I can, and they use the freedom of the press to get digital clicks through flaming. I reckon I am in a better position, but that is merely my view on the matter and lets face it, they could call it delusional. I wonder what they will call it AFTER I am proven correct? I reckon it will be stated that this was too complex an issue for people with a university degree in journalism. 

In the end, I still get my money, or my share and I am willing to make amends to that setting, the reward of screwing over the media will be that big a deal for me to cut a few corners leaving me with millions less. Or I still end with the amount of zero, the amount I always expected to end with when it all becomes public domain. I wonder, if I do this, will it be public domain, or pubic domain? Not the weirdest question to get, although, pretty extreme for a Wednesday. 

Such is life!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 4, 2022 · 21:49

Monopoly

My introduction, like many of my generation came at an early age. I was 8 or 9 when the first setting of law was introduced. It was the game of monopoly. I still have a few versions. I still have the first version (a replica). It was a wooden box with coins, the rest was pretty much the same. The coins were a nice touch. A game has rules and we have to adhere to these rules. It was then that we learned to play by the spirit of the law. The letter of the law was something I learned much later and it was even later when I was introduced to black letter law. My generation went through similar steps, some more, some less, but the generic stage was in play. 

And today I got my introduction to ‘Banned Russian oligarchs exploited UK secrecy loophole’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62410715), so the title gives us the first setting, not a loophole but a legally allowed setting, and with that we get to “Ministers have acknowledged concerns that these companies, known as English Limited Partnerships (ELPs), have also been abused by criminals” as well as “In 2016 and 2017, the government introduced measures that forced almost all UK companies to identify their real owners. ELPs were not covered by these new transparency laws” yet no one (including the press) seems to ask why the ELP’s were left uncovered by identity stages? This is not merely a loophole, this is what I would call a backdoor. The UK (optionally government) needed a stage where owners could remain hidden for whatever reason was in play and others have the same rights as anyone else and these others (criminals and tycoons) used the law to avoid detection. And as we get “more than 4,500 of them have been set up” we see the larger station, you see this has been going on since 2017, did you think that whomever requires avoidance of detection will not use them? There is a reason why some accountancy firms charge so much, they know the law, they know all laws and that is in play. And I will go one step further when we see “According to Graham Barrow, an expert in financial crime, they are also “vulnerable to misuse” because of how little information about their activity they are required to make public” that is exactly why the backdoor exists. For some to avoid certain matters. I feel decently certain that they were not meant for criminals, but the law is funny, it will parade on the just and unjust alike. So when we are given “Our data shows the number of new ELPs being set up has gone up by 53% since 2017” I am actually not surprised. The rules of the game are clear and anonymity is coveted by the lawful and unlawful alike and now we have a situation. So whilst the BBC is trying to stage the wow factor with “Just five companies, known as formation agencies, have been responsible for 1,500 ELPs, with hundreds listed at registered addresses including one above a burrito bar in central London” I would like to remind them that MI-5 was build on a sewer. So instead of the burrito bar, they could have stated above a burrito bar in Soho, a different setting, not? And the empty statement “FBI agents investigating the Boston marathon bombing probed an ELP registered at an address currently home to a barber shop in Bristol”, so what was the result? Why was that ELP probed? What was the stage of that barbershop? And in that setting when we see “We have established that among those to take advantage of the secrecy of ELPs are members of President Putin’s inner circle.” So? It is a legally allowed setting, that is what the BBC is trying to make muddy. A legal setting is staged and no one sees anything of the politicians that ‘overlooked’ that part of the stage, why is that? And when we are given “there is no requirement to disclose who was behind Sinara, which was dissolved in 2019” we see no listing of illegal activities, merely “facilitated purchases for the Rotenbergs”, so was anything illegal purchased? We do not get any of that, it is a mere sample of BS journalism that we normally get from a Murdoch publication. And it sounds nice that we get Labour MP Dame Margaret Hodge, who chairs a parliamentary group on tax and corruption making statements regarding ‘scandalous’, but what politicians allowed for that, who raised their voices when the ELP’s were left outside the identity stations? Transparency requires ALL to be revealed, not all minus ONE. But that part of the equation is quickly brushed over by the BBC, why is that? So when we are given “In an emailed update to clients dated 18 May 2017, under the heading “Alternative Solutions”, LAS proposed ELPs as, “a way out and as a substitute for Scottish Partnerships”.” We see a simple setting, a firm updating their clients on what is legally allowed, but that part is not really given, is it. It is a setting of emotions, flaming stages but the people behind the overlook are ignored, left in the dark, why is that? And the one gem in the article is seen with “The government says it does not have any evidence of significant misuse of ELPs. A government spokesperson said: “The UK already has some of the strongest controls in the world to combat money laundering, and it’s vital that we continue to upgrade our governance to crack down on criminals abusing UK corporate entities” it is the stage of ‘significant misuse’, what makes it significant? The fact that the bulk of these ELP’s were created by 5 firms was a much larger station and could have been dealt with years ago, now it becomes a millstone around someones neck there is ‘sudden’ visibility. Yet in the time 2017-2020, who gave light to this? Who acted to stop it? These are questions that I do not see answered, why not?

In this there was a lovely simplicity to monopoly in my youth, perhaps for this day and age it is too simple. Perhaps we need a new version of Hotels, but in Hotels 2 we get to choose options like accountants, corrupt local government and a few other items, or will that make the game a little too realistic for the young? I will let you consider that, I am going back to brooding on new IP towards non repudiation, I reckon that new building in the KSA (the Line) might have need of some IP soon enough. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 2, 2022 · 19:39

Lets talk about corruption

It is a hard stage, but it is time to ask the difficult question “Is the BBC too corrupt?” It is not a question you saw coming. It is not one we would consider, but the stage is set. We need to ask the question because too much has happened. And today with ‘What could Saudi Arabia and UAE do to help lower oil prices?’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62352272) I am asking that question. After the issues with Jimmy Saville and Martin Bashir we now see increased oil misrepresentations. You see, the question seems fair, but what I do not see is that Brent Crude oil prices are set to the fact that the US exports about 8.63 million barrels per day and they net imported 6.11 million barrels, so why import when you also export? For the price and we see none of that. They want cheap oil from Saudi Arabia, the UAE and any other OPEC source, so that they can sell at a profit, but we see none of that. We are merely given “Saudi Arabia is the biggest single producer in the cartel and after meeting with Saudi crown prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, President Biden said he expects supply to increase. However, Saudi officials have also stressed any decision to increase supplies would be done in consultation with Opec+.” It is my opinion that until the US and EU show firmly to be allies of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that OPEC+ does NOTHING! We need to become less dependent on oil, and the only option is to reduce its need. Not by Matt McGrath and his stupid airline articles, but by setting a clear boundary of what oil can be used for. In the US transportation requires 67.2% of all the oil available. How about setting markers to reduce that to 65% in the next 3 years? How about reducing these BS flights? On November 13th 2021 in the article ‘A COP26 truth’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/11/13/a-cop26-truth/) I wrote “over the last 15 years 15,000,000 additional flights were added. That amounts to 41,000 flights a day, every single day. So how much CO2 do these flights create? More people and more flights, not the flights from the uber rich, no normal airline flights. I am willing to take a bet that at least 25% of those flights are useless and could be scrapped.” So people like Taylor Swift were not the polluters, and jokes like Matt McGrath (BBC) who go on about the rich jet owners. How much pollution are they making? How much pollution do these EXTRA 41,000 flights each day create? There is your oil savings, right there. One source (AFR) gave us in 2018 “the flights have been departing only 78.1 per cent full, on average, since the route was launched – meaning dozens of empty seats.” One destination, one liner. So how many more liners are too empty? Prestige at the expense of the environment, but the BBC will not give us that, will they? 

As I see it, the KSA must do what is best for the KSA and its citizens and as I see it. When you can sell strawberries by taking your time with each portion gives the farmer more to work with. You see oil is a finite commodity and when it is gone, it is gone forever but we seem to forget that, do we not? The media keeps on giving us the Middle East story about infinite oil reserves, but that is not the case and the US is passed over in all that reporting. The media oil reports give us none of the Brent Crude oil parts, are they? So when I saw the Line and the KSA options to set itself apart, I saw a station for at least three of my IP to flourish, and if they see that too the KSA will get it. I would have preferred it to go to Amazon or Google, but they weren’t biting and that is before some realise that there is still a treasure trove of 50 million streaming users around. And when the oil falls down then so does electricity (unless they make a deal with Elon Musk). Elon was the clever one, with the seats of power changing, space becomes a much more interesting commodity. Yet the foundation is that the media (including the BBC) have watered down the events of attacks by Houthi terrorists on Saudi civilian targets for too long, the US did pretty much the same thing and keeps on shouting Khashoggi (the columnist no one really cares about). In that environment why should the KSA do anything? It seems that oil will sell no matter what and at this point at a much higher price. For two years the KSA gave light to project Neom, the media shunned it. Why?

There is only so much BS we can stand for and there comes a time when people ask “How corrupt is the media?” And in light of the events I just showed you, I name my bewilderment by its name, a specific name. I wonder how corrupt the BBC has become. You need not believe me, but watch what is reported and I gave you 5 topics in this article. And when you realise that the BBC started the settings that would be the death of Princes Diana, princes of Wales, you need to get angry. The media is very set on reporting on the death dealer of Princes Diana (Martin Bashir) all whilst we see speculation after speculation on others and a remarkable avoidance of fact checking. I will admit that the BBC is still better than most, but in the Houthi settings they let too much go and this time around they need help from the victim of Houthi attack. So how do you think that will end?

It is merely the setting of a stage, but I will let you look at all the elements of that stage. I gave the evidence (as I personally see it) in my articles often enough. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 31, 2022 · 19:02

Place with a view

That is the stage, we have a view, we all have a view and we tend to have a point of interest. This ‘mess’ all started a few hours ago when I saw a three day old article on the BBC with ‘The public relations and ad firms refusing fossil fuel clients’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62303026) in the first instance, it is fine to refuse work, it is not always clever, but I get it. We have all kinds of industries that we shun and it is fashionable to shun fossil fuel clients, but it seems a little hypocritical to do so. So when I see “Last year, she decided that Done! would become one of the now 350 advertising and PR firms who have joined a movement called Clean Creatives. Joining the movement means they pledge to refuse any future work for fossil fuel firms, or their trade associations.” I merely shrug it off. It is a little superficial and somewhat hypocrite to do so. 

Why?
Until ALL employees of that firm travel with all means that use no fossil fuel, they still depend on it. Until they have an Elon Musk battery solution for the house heating, the equipment running, they rely on fossil fuels. So to shun fossil fuel firms is a little hypocrite as I personally see it.

The article also gives us “The United Nations (UN) recognises that the burning of fossil fuels – oil, natural gas and coal – “are by far the largest contributor to climate change”. It says that they account for “nearly 90% of all carbon dioxide emissions”.” That is nice, but the facts are ignored, the MEDIA is doing everything to spin it into another direction. I discussed this in ‘Uniform Nameless Entitlement Perforation’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/10/uniform-nameless-entitlement-perforation/) There we see a report by the EEA (European Environment Agency) where the cover gives us that 1% of the plant are responsible for 50% of the damage, so what do people like Matt McGrath (according to some a journalist) state? “Global ‘elite’ will need to slash high-carbon lifestyles” Yea right. Fossil fuels are here to stay. If you wonder why, wonder why the US sells 73% of its oil and then sends President Biden with its hand up to the UAE and Saudi Arabia asking for more cheap oil. The article sounds nice, and it is nice that someone takes a step in any direction, but with staff shortages as they are they can make all the presumption they want. I wonder where those ideals stay when it becomes a dog eat dog situation again. 

So when we see “The fossil fuel industry uses advertising agencies and PR agencies to make it harder for governments to hold them accountable. And ads are misleading and make companies seem more committed to climate action than they really are.” No one is asking when will the media give us the larger game where the US sells 73% of its oil, in that they become the foundation of shortage, but we do not really get to see that story, do we?

Reality
The reality is that we all realise that we need to change gears, we need other solutions and it is there that we see the larger problem. The EU with 147 facilities that the media avoids. The larger station that there are options and Elon Musk has several of them and in 2 years no one made a clear step towards instigating changes that allow for a different approach to the need of fossil fuel.  Not today, not yesterday, not last week. The foundation of options has been out and about for 2 years. Governments all over the world have shunned these solutions, as such the story of some PR firms shunning certain players reads like a joke. Governments are at the centre of inactions, but we do not get to see that part, do we? And all this BS of making the fossil fuel companies the bad player is partly a joke. Yes, they are not innocent, yet the world needs oil, that is clear as day and until the people leave their cars at home they can bloody well shut up. 

So when we see the end of the article “A lot of agencies will come to the point where they have to make the decision if they want to be able to recruit the brightest,” says Ms Townsend. “The young ones don’t want to work with oil and gas [clients].” Yes, that sounds nice and it is good to have ethical boundaries, but lets be clear. The government, the media are all in favour or misrepresenting certain parts, why are they not illuminating that side? Or are we putting fossil fuels quietly with the weapons and gambling branches? Because that has worked so well in the last decade. For me? I am in a different field, but if I can make good money in a branch and it is not illegal, ethical choices when I see the media and governments play catch and release with the truth and facts too shallow for words. 

In the end, I have nothing against Marian Ventura or her point of view, she is entitled to one and she is sticking to her guns (as it seems). But to read this in the BBC whilst Matt McGrath goes on his ‘Global ‘elite’ will need to slash high-carbon lifestyles’ Don Quijote tour whilst the EEA gave us 1% of the facilities create 50% of the damage and he has not once, NOT ONCE taken a full page investigating that side of things, is just a little too hypocritical to my liking. 

But it could just be me, you judge, the December 10th article I mentioned earlier has that report. 

Yes there is a place, there are many places and they all have a view, but I have some serious issues with the view I am seeing.

Enjoy!

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 14, 2022 · 19:28

Realisation

This happens, at times we realise something AFTER the fact and for some reason not before. The BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62158936) ‘Netflix and Microsoft team up for cheaper plan with adverts’, apart from the setting that they decided to trust Microsoft on this, the setting of movies or TV series with advertisements is called TV, The Dutch have channels one, two and three. The Brits have the same but they call it BBC One, Two and oh, four is ITV. And so every nation has its own version of TV, so why would we want Netflix when we can get the others for free? It comes with “It lost 200,000 subscribers between January and March, compared to the 2.5 million analysts had been expecting the firm to add in the period. Netflix also now expects to lose a further two million subscribers between April and June.” And this is a surprise? How? The covid era ended, people are expected to be back in the offices and do actual work. And those who decided to quit their jobs to be at home for whatever reason will soon be in a space where they CANNOT afford Netflix. Instead of offering an 8 hour segment (when they aren’t working) for less, and as such create 3-6 timezones to capture the bandwidth pressures, they decided to compete with local TV stations at a price, whilst local TV is free. I reckon (and that I merely my view) that the people will stop subscription TV, especially as some favourite series are spread over several providers. And these people will return to Channel 7, Channel 9, ITV, RTL+, Sjuan, TMC, TFX and the list goes on for a while. I reckon that they will not be too happy with Netflix and they will demand local based sanctions against Netflix. In addition, some will demand that the bandwidth usage of Netflix users will be capped or even surcharged to avoid congestion on several levels. It is not whether it happens, it will soon be on WHEN it happens. Especially when the Amazon and Google group could stick it to Microsoft, they will be enthusiastically motivated to do just that. 

Do I care?
Not really, I sometimes get a month subscription to load up on missed things and I have to as we all have budgets. I reckon that the UK is facing a much harder time. When they get to decide on two of the items (Food, Rent and heating) Netflix will be the first to go, and after that cheaper internet deals. The cost of living bites everywhere and Netflix should have seen this coming. I think they did not, because in all my dealings with Americans, they always avoided any discussion on market saturation, it was always the fault of the bad salesperson. This time around there is no escaping it, and I saw this setting in 2020 when I was clear about saturation, and they were all in the stage of ‘We never heard that’ but the stage was clear and Covid ended as such the good times were gone and now Netflix with their desperate act decided to rely on Microsoft. Whether these two are in bed because of the Netflix game streaming is unknown to me, but it would not surprise me. And that too will backfire on them when Tencent comes out to play. Tencent could muscle in on both Amazon Luna and Google Stadia as well if these two did not adjust their way of thinking. 

These players are all realising that there is one population and they can no longer afford EVERYTHING. These people have to make choices, some of them hard and depending on what TV brings instead of Netflix comes with $10 a month savings, for a lot of people it will be a simple choice. It is this realisation that governs the global population. If EU inflation is up by 8.6% (last month), how long until people have to select what food they can afford? This is not out of consideration at present, the UK seems to be going back to the daily fish and chips. In the Netherlands some vegetables went up between 29% and 34%, that is HUGE! It is in this setting that Netflix makes a move the way they did and at some point people will realise that they get the same by watching TV, which does not cost them $10 a month, and that was the only reason keeping them on Netflix. Realisation is a dangerous and ugly thing. Yes, we can continue to watch Netflix, but how long until those prices go up? Which will drive a lot of people towards their normal local TV stations again, some already did. 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, movies

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 10, 2022 · 20:38

The joke on any corporation

Yes, there are corporations that are comfy and good and there are corporations that due to hiring practices and whether they rely on hiring teams or recruiters are soon to be seen as a joke. It all started with ‘The over-qualified workers struggling to find a job’ (at https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20220705-the-over-qualified-workers-struggling-to-find-a-job). There we see several connecting issues, but what caught my eye was “In some instances, recruiters can see workers applying for positions apparently ‘below’ their current career level as a red flag”, you see there are two problems with that. The first is their subjective view, one that is often given to them by superiors who have lost all connection to a working force that is now beyond their comprehension. The second one is that I had been looking for something for almost 8 years. The fact is that this boss is a lot better than the previous two. I had actually forgotten what it was to be treated like a person. That last part is on me, but it is still unnerving how the workaholic setting took over my life and made me less than human. So there are issues all over the field and as this work force is experiencing a new breath of life. Bosses that treat their staff good (like mine now) will suddenly find an abundance of interest, because everyone wants to work for such a boss. 

So it is a new sight to work for, in an age of shortage a lot of people will have learned that more pay is second best to nice treatment. The second issue is seen in ““In hiring, you have to act paranoid,” he says. “If someone is coming down a level or two, and they’ve likely already achieved what the role offers, then you have to ask questions about their motivation.”” The recruiter is again in short supply of brain matter. It is old way thinking, the idea that a good boss with prospects in 1-3 years is preferable than a new challenge with no future in sight is beyond their scope of vision. Knowing you can do the job matters, it always did, but the Deloitte idea of a bigger future is still on their brains, even though beyond Deloitte and half a dozen firms that idea will never be delivered on, merely speculated on. I reckon that a player like Deloitte is one of the few that actually delivered on their mission statement. The rest will hide behind “It is a complex situation and we are feeling the market right now” is an excuse that was acceptable 10 years ago but it is obsolete now. And it is worse when you see the impossible way where Amazon is burning through  the global workforce. There is every chance that they will become the first undesirable employer for the working class (packaging and shipping). Fortune reported less than a month ago ‘Amazon’s warehouse problems? It’s running out of workers to hire, and has too much space’, it had become a place where proper robotics and automation would have made all the difference, but there is a chance that they could buckle before that point is reached. So in all this as we see temp agencies and recruiters seeking people, they had ventured on the wrong highway and when we see “In turning down such workers, employers may say they’re too experienced for the position. Sometimes, they inform them that they’re simply not the best fit for the company.” We suddenly see the failure that Apple stores engaged in, to seek the average person, not the inspiring one that is handled by a senior to get that person on board for the Apple frame of mind. Look in any Apple store, all young, dynamic and in some cases clueless past the Apple articles they promote. Some will try to adjust their way of thinking and that is good, but those who wrongly assessed a person will not just lose that person, it will lose that persons friends as well. You see in this atmosphere of hiring shortage the recruiters relying on capturing resume’s with fake jobs will not survive for long, the ones who did a fair job and adjust to a new working atmosphere will be around a lot longer. You can watch it happen in the short term at a recruiter agency near you. As I personally see it they all had the same flaw, instead of collecting resume’s they should have engaged with the candidate and whether it was their boss who told them, or their own insight that 500 resume’s will get them their bonus faster than engaging with 50 candidates is a numbers game, but I reckon that any recruiter that engaged with 50 candidates will have a much better 2022 than the other one. Mark my words.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

July 7, 2022 · 19:44

Interestingly unknown

It was the BBC that got me here. Their article ‘Arabs believe economy is weak under democracy’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-62001426) has a few debatable sides, but these debates come from a preset mind that did not have access to all the evidence (read: raw data). Yes, that would be my mind, but the setting is interesting. And the mental race get tarted with “Michael Robbins, director of Arab Barometer, a research network based at Princeton University which worked with universities and polling organisations in the Middle East and North Africa to conduct the survey between late 2021 and Spring 2022, says there has been a regional shift in views on democracy since the last survey in 2018/19.” And when we get to ‘Rise in people who agree the economy is weak under a democracy’ we see that nearly all of them went up, only Morocco remains under 50%, the rest is higher and Iraq gets up to nearly 75%. It is interesting that a question ‘This country needs a leader who can bend the rules to get things done’ There too Morocco is in a doubt, but so are the Palestinian territories, the rest is largely in favour of that statement. In most cases, the economic challenges are on most minds and that makes sense. Only in Tunisia, Iraq and Libya is corruption a much larger fish than other nations. It is when we get to the question ‘More than one in three people ran out of money to buy more food’, the question seems trivial, but the fact that it is 68% in Egypt seems OK, it is the fact that the same question scores below 50% in Lebanon, Jordan, Morocco, and Palestinian Territories when we see the News from all kinds of sources the fact that food prices and hunger is not on the forefront in at least 2 nations comes across as weird to me, yet as I stated. I never saw the raw data and these results should be scrutinised. The lack of an N is several charts give rise to debate, Also, it seems nice to see percentages, but if Jordan has an N of 3500 and Libya has an N of 12500, the setting becomes slightly warped and weighting data is dangerous, especially when you compare different groups. There is a lot more, but that is not up for discussion without seeing the raw data and the complete report. But I am speaking too soon, you see at the end we see “The project interviewed 22,765 people face-to-face in nine countries and the Palestinian territories” yet the one thing I do not see it that the cultural stage towards government changes per region. You see Tunisia, I see Kibili, Sfax and Kef. And we can do that for each of the nations. Now it is possible that the Arab Barometer took all that in account, but I cannot tell at present and lets be clear. I am not attacking the article, or the results. I like the setting, but at all times I keep a skeptical mind awake. The setting that clearly shows the desire for strong leaders is nothing against a democracy, it is that democratic nations have largely shown nothing more than indecisiveness and ‘corporate corruption’ to coin a phrase. There is a lot more going on and the fact that the media is part of the problem is also a debatable setting in all this and the Arab nations have seen too much of that too, but that too is a debatable side in all this. In the end, the article is good reading and it does refer to sources and methodology. If only the BBC had thought a few matters through and added a few more parts, but as I stated, these thoughts are debatable, so I am putting myself under similar scrutiny, because I would hate to judge anyone on items that seem incomplete. And it is one of the final parts “It is of Arab world opinion, so does not include Iran, Israel or Turkey, though it does include the Palestinian territories. Most countries in the region are included but several Gulf governments refused full and fair access to the survey. The Kuwait and Algeria results came in too late to include in the BBC Arabic coverage. Syria could not be included due to the difficulty of access.” So the question is raised with “several Gulf governments refused full and fair access to the survey” Did that include Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen? Yemen might be excluded for a few natural reasons, but the others? 

A setting that requires scrutiny, because the Arab voice with 6 missing voices? It does not make the other views invalid, merely debatable and optionally one sided as the UAE, Oman and Saudi Arabia are Monarchies, but that is merely my view on the matter.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 5, 2022 · 01:50

Everything must go

Yes, it is a term we see in fire sales and in all all kind of desperate needs. But lucky for the Ukraine there is a solution. After the war, the EU and US take possession of EVERYTHING in the hermitage. It might not be enough, but it should be enough to cover well over 50%, and the Russians could redecorate it for all the oligarchs who are not that welcome in Europe or the US. To some degree I feel for them, because there is no way that they were all aware, or all agree what is going on, and after they lost everything (thanks to Putin), they will need to stay somewhere and it better looks nice, so the Hermitage is a decent solution. It will be a bit barren after we take everything from it, but there are a few other museums, as such the Hermitage could be decently decorated as a refuge for oligarchs. If there is one oligarch I feel for, it would be Roman Abramovich. I do not know the man, but he was nuts about his Chelsea team. I personally do not care about football, so I cannot relate, but I can relate to loss of something a person worked on for that long. He became owner in 2003, and in that time the club won 18 major trophies, that is some achievement, you cannot deny that and a person that vested into a football club has his minds far away from the war machine of Putin. I reckon many will disagree with me, but that is how I see it. And his actions on keeping the club safe were highly commendable. 

It needs to be said, we cannot rule out all oligarchs, but if there would be even one, this man would be it. And this also relates to what comes next, the Russians might think that this is over, that this is going their way, but the EU and US are ready for them now, they are willing to take over Saint Petersburg as a breach for Russia. As we can see the Russians who were supposed to have the largest and most powerful army (they would be in first or second position) Now they are nowhere near that and as such Russia is about to face an army a lot stronger and better trained than the Ukrainian one. They were 21st on the military power list and they stopped and fought back an army a lot stronger than them. Now that the damage is all over the place, they have no reserves left for NATO making it also a very dangerous stage. It reminds me of the cornered cat and the weird jumps they will make. The problem is that Russia is also a nuclear state and even as they know that it will be the last move they ever make, Russia will not handover the treasures of the Hermitage, they are already in a stage of stealing grain, as such we will see that their position is sliding from bad to disastrous. And when you consider that the Hermitage has 3 million art pieces from all kinds of era’s, the idea that 2,755 billionaires would want to buy a piece of art (at discount) is not to be disregarded. And now as the BBC gives us “We need $750bn to rebuild country – Ukraine”, is see a simple sum. If all these billionaires spend $345 million, we end up with $963 billion. Solving the repair issues. I reckon that the costs will increase, so if we could get the upper echelon of these billionaires spend twice or three times that amount (with a little more discount) Ukraine would be in a better place. There is still all the confiscated oligarch materials, but I am actually not sure if that will all go the proper way. Some of this stuff is properly registered in trusts, so we might not get that much from that group. Yes, I heard all the noise, but in the end legal settings prevail and as such some of these oligarchs have their stuff securely set in paperwork. As such, I thought out of the box and I am setting the stage of confiscating 3 million pieces of art from ONE place. I do not think that anyone else had thought of that, or at least not in places I read materials. 

Russia has a few more places like that, but the Hermitage is perhaps the most famous one of them all. So let the bidding begin. I want an omelette tomorrow, So I am bidding $0.35 per faberge egg, 6 eggs make an omelette, so where would I deposit the $2.10 (plus shipping and handling)? You think that this is a joke, and it would be a bad one. I reckon that the ‘true’ friends of Putin are securing their hold on these art pieces even now as I am typing this. In the end, in 2023, what do you think the Russian state will be worth when new years day 2023 comes calling? You think it is long, but it is a mere 25 weeks away and at present the Ukrainian war has lasted now almost 4.5 months is nowhere near one, yet the Russian machine is running out of generals, colonels, fuel and a few other items. What do you think will happen when NATO knocks on the door at the border of Poland and Belarus. I reckon that they will not put Finland in a bind by going there to invade Saint-Petersburg, but the NATO navy could sail straight through to Saint Petersburg and use it as a beachhead (whilst confiscating the art in the Hermitage). These are pure speculations, I have absolutely no data supporting this, but I would take that route. Belarus will have to put up or shut up and from there it becomes a simple race to Moscow. With the Russians having so much damage, the rest of their equipment might not in a much better state. Just a thought!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 2, 2022 · 17:38

Crimes pay better

Yes, it is the old axiom again and for a long time there was an expression it was “Crime does not pay”, we saw the old remedy in this and we saw it repeated in movies, in TV. The simple given truth that crime does not pay. 

But the world evolved, capital crime left us, judges (or as some call them lobotomised lawyers) became pussies all whilst police and politicians became even less useful. So in the last 2 decades crime became massively rewarding. Not small crimes though, the bigger the crime the larger the chance of running away and for the few that did get caught places like Netflix offer large sums of money for the movie rights. You think I am kidding? Consider the BBC giving us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-61966824) ‘Missing crypto queen: Is Dr Ruja Ignatova the biggest Bitcoin holder?’ There we see “The scammer disappeared in 2017 as her cryptocurrency OneCoin was at its height – attracting billions from investors. Fraud and money-laundering charges in the US have led to her becoming one of the FBI’s 10 most wanted fugitives. The Oxford-educated entrepreneur told investors she had created the “Bitcoin killer”, but the files suggest she secretly amassed billions in her rival currency before she disappeared.” With the added “Details first surfaced in 2021 in leaked documents from Dubai’s courts, posted online by a lawyer who crowned Dr Ruja – as she’s known – the “most successful criminal in history”” so what gives rise to this article? Well that is the nice part. I first crossed virtual paths with her in ‘The citizen model’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/11/03/the-citizen-model/) it was November 2021. And there I wrote “apart from the stage of Fraud and scamming, she broke no laws, she was extremely careful not to break any. Then on 25 October that year she boarded a Ryanair flight from Sofia to Athens, and vanished off the face of the Earth.” We got to the fact that a lease was signed in 2016 and we were in addition given “the lease was signed in August 2016, financial regulators in at least one European country had already issued a warning about OneCoin. A few months earlier, Dr Ruja had pleaded guilty to fraud and other charges in a German court, after bankrupting a metal factory she’d bought and leaving 150 people jobless in 2011” as such there were issues going back to 2011. And in 2022 (7 hours ago) we see she is now FBI’s top 10 people. The law required 6 years, 6 years where she lived as the queen she was labeled to be. Optionally having a high-rise floor in Dubai with views like this

As her ‘personal’ retirement place. Reading books, watching movies, drinking and having whatever she needs delivered to her floor, or the office of her personal assistant. 6 years and optionally 6 more years, or perhaps even 16 more years. Now you might want to go that way and try to become the next whatever it is you think you’ll be. Yet like quarterbacks, Nobel winners and Stanley cup holders, very few get there and those who do not will be made an example of, that is the only direction the law can go now. They need to rectify 6 years of blunders on one case alone. The UK (London) will have to adjust their secrecy policy on housing and there is a lot more that needs to happen. In the end there is no way telling where this goes, but the one criminal who got away with well over 5 billion might be the last one in generations to do so.

The simple truth is now becoming that either they make sure that the story of ‘Crime does not pay’ becomes a reality or chaos will be the next hurdle they face and as far as I can tell, there is no western government that can properly deal with any kind of chaos. They fear it more than crime. It is one of the hard lessons the UK learned last year, and a few other governments learned this lesson the hard way too. The pandemic made that crystal clear. And in a world where some freedom of movement remains, these criminals will be hard pushed to get to any place where they are not wanted, where they can hide in luxury like hermits, their houses beyond large, beyond well equipped and beyond reproach and that is where they will spend the next two decades as the world goes under through war, poverty and lack of resources. They got out in time and Dr Ruja Ignatova might be the last one to do so. In the mean time the FBI is looking for her in places where they have no jurisdiction, where they get no cooperation and they can look and state “She is not in the US”, which might have been the one mistake Ghislaine Maxwell had made. For some people crime paid better and it is still the foundation of their lavish lifestyle until 2050. After that people like Dr Ruja Ignatova will offer their life story for immunity and money to Netflix and some will treasure that approach because in a world of revenue cash is king, and most likely always will be.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,