Tag Archives: business

January 8, 2025 · 00:57

Dens, first name Evie

That is the setting where I am. It was the BBC that gave me (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9q78wn9g8zo) where we see ‘US designates Tencent a Chinese military company’ and my first question is “By what evidence?” You see, we can go back to the European tour by Colin Powell, armed with a silver briefcase where he travelled around Europe like a rockstar and that is how we got into the Iraqi war. They had graphics (probably a powerpoint presentation). Then we got the accusations against Huawei. We never got to see any evidence and as I saw it America was afraid to lose the 5G war and they basically still did. Now we get that Tencent is on route to basically throw Microsoft in the dirt and now they are a military complex? To do what? Unite gamers all over the world? And what evidence do we get? The simplistic line “including gaming and social media giant Tencent” Where is the evidence? Then we are given “The list serves as a warning to American companies and organisations about the risks of doing business with Chinese entities. While inclusion does not mean an immediate ban, it can add pressure on the US Treasury Department to sanction the firms.” Funny, Tencent was offered my gaming solution that would bring them 6 billion a year in phase one, after that the numbers become interesting. You see, Amazon had no interest (they never contacted me) and as such the Amazon Luna seems to be out of consideration, Google placed themself outside the scope as they deleted the Google Stadia and I will not let Microsoft near any of my IP (as I personally see them, they are losers that rely on the gods of mediocrity) which leaves Tencent. As I see it, the first stage would get them a nominal annual revenue of up to 6 billion, which is set to 50,000,000 consoles. After that with up to 200 million consoles the ride becomes exciting. I offered it also to Saudi Arabia and Kingdom Holding as they have larger concerns in this and There is a hidden pleasure in me to see Saudi Arabia end up above Microsoft, they are that irrelevant to me. It would also impact Facebook (Meta) revenue, but I cannot say to what extent (lack of numbers and achievable timeline)

A simple setting I saw 3 years ago and no one seemingly caught on. 

As such we see all kinds of wannabe players, but there is no evidence, at least it is not clearly given. And when we get to “In response to the latest announcement Tencent, which owns the messaging app WeChat, said its inclusion on the list was “clearly a mistake.” “We are not a military company or supplier. Unlike sanctions or export controls, this listing has no impact on our business,” a spokesperson for the company told the BBC.” Some might catch on that America is merely trying to to prevent Microsoft to go several steps closer to bankruptcy. So they are setting (in my personal believe) the status for Europe to shun Chinese firms. Yet the larger setting is that they are merely setting up the shop for Tencent to become close to an Arabic and Asian provider to entertainment. So in 2-3 years when Tencent, TikTok and Huawei grow beyond their borders we will see the scared Europeans go overboard and let them into their areas and as I see it Tencent is on the brink of shutting Microsoft out of a population of close to 3 billion people (Asia, India, Arabian nations, Indonesia and Bangladesh) and as such as they get the people on their side Europe with over half a billion people will be joining them as well. Microsoft might be a 3 trillion company but I reckon that in a year with failure after failure, their vaults and coffers will look rather slim-lined. 

And for the people thinking I am bluffing, well, you are allowed to think that, but consider a small setting. Microsoft lost to Nintendo and Sony and all we get all the junk news like that they are working on a handheld computer. The problem is that Nintendo is already there and Tencent is coming as well (exact time unknown to me). So Microsoft is already in third place and it will get worse from there, because you need people in the end and they are somewhere else and now that they are ‘advocating’ cloud gaming with TV’s we need to realise that this require too much bandwidth, as such that ship is sailing fast towards the abyss of failure (as I personally see it). Then we get their Surface pro and the short and sweet is that it is nowhere as useful as what Apple has. I see that as another failure. You see in the 11 years that contraption was around, it did not push Apple from the winning pedestal. No matter how much they spin the story. And when you consider that gaming and tablet as well as the fact that Blizzard and Bethesda were bought for 75 billion. So how much did they make? Nowhere near that much and Starfield was a bust from the beginning. Billions in the Surface pro and that is not paying off either. So how many failures can they survive? And now Tencent is entering gaming with the option to create serious waves. It is the impact of innovation. As I see it, spin gets you nowhere and now the new spin for players like Microsoft is to let the administration deal with the Chinese and with the return president elect Trump Microsoft is cheering as President elect Trump is anti-Chinese. But the trouble isn’t what they have. It is that over 4 billion do not see America as the centre of the universe. Which gives Tencent an option and when (speculative) Tencent will adhere to the stage of Harmony OS, the setting for Microsoft and Google goes down a mot more. You see HarmonyOS joined iOS and Android on the world stage. Yes, it is a mere third place, but every step they make is one that Apple and Google lose and Google has more problems because of the stupidity of the American legal system. They are just slicing pieces of the revenue pie for Huawei to take a bite from and as Huawei grows Google and Apple will lose some market share. And as Huawei and Tencent connect they will both grow stronger. How strong? That is not easy to say, but the small beginning will endure over time and America pushed for this and now it is too late. As the market changes Huawei and Tencent will robustly grow to some effect. Now we get the ‘accusation’ that Tencent is part of the Chinese military companies, which is formally known as the Section 1260H. And that is a nice game, but the others (pretty much all others) want to see evidence as Europe and the Commonwealth will demand evidence. They are seeing what revenue these two players bring and Microsoft merely brought failure after failure. As I see it innovation talks and failure walks alone and when someone will consider the turncoat metrics of Microsoft trying to get whatever they can as their console and tablet fails to do. As for Azure? It is lagging behind AWS (Amazon) by 50%, so don’t get your hope up. Another failure as I see it. So how much revenue is lost over these three parts only? So as the secretary of the Pentagon is not too busy (Miss E Dens) we would like to see the evidence that Tencent is part of the Chinese military. I don’t say it is not, I merely want to see evidence for a change (we never saw the WMD evidence, or the Huawei evidence), just for argument sake.

Have a great day, my Wednesday started 3000 seconds ago.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Military, Politics

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

December 16, 2024 · 18:57

The statistics are against me

Yup, that happens and I don’t believe it is a worrying issue. You see, it started a little over a year ago and I created my first (sort of) script. It is called ‘How to assassinate a politician’ which I later ‘reset’ to ‘Essay’. MY first script was meant specifically for an islamic audience which could have graced the walls of the UAE or the Saudi media bosses. I saw the story and it was my response to an Islamophobe population. And how to better serve it than to assassinate the biggest European islamophobic of all Geert Wilders (now PM of the Netherlands). I thought it was an excellent idea (a pure personal thought). Yet now I am confronted with ‘How the creative economy drives growth in the Middle East’ (at https://economymiddleeast.com/news/how-creative-economy-drives-growth-middle-east/). Here I see “In the UAE, a global creative hub, Dubai Media City is home to a talent pool of over 40,500 creative professionals”, so what was I thinking? Well, the short of this is that I write to feed the creative beast in me. I was unaware of just how large the Media City population was, and if you go by that setting you will never get anything done.

And whilst you are mulling over “The UN Trade and Development Creative Economy Outlook 2024 highlights the crucial role of creative industries in global trade and economic growth. According to the UNCTAD survey, the creative economy contributes between 0.5 percent and 7.3 percent of GDP and employs 0.5 percent to 12.5 percent of the workforce in various countries. “The creative economy has the right forces pushing its sails. This is not just art. It is an economic powerhouse that we must harness together, leaving no one behind,” stated Rebeca Grynspan, secretary-general of UNCTAD.”” You see, it is nice to hide behind numbers at one setting, but the source of the numbers matter a well. I find a little worrying setting behind the statement “The creative economy has the right forces pushing its sails. This is not just art. It is an economic powerhouse that we must harness together, leaving no one behind” my issue is in one direction “leaving no one behind”, which is nice, but that is a political statement and Grynspan was in the past Grynspan was a professor and researcher at the Economic Science Research Institute at the University of Costa Rica. This is not some anti statement. I always wonder and become ‘skeptical’ when a politician makes a “leaving no one behind” in their setting. Because that tends to rally towards “We were however forced to make choices” and that always goes at the expense of Art, especially when dollar numbers are involved. That and the setting of “employs 0.5 percent to 12.5 percent of the workforce in various countries”, which is quite the distribution. So where is it 12.5%? Hollywood with its 153,859 villagers? Some other consideration would be ‘the UNCTAD survey’, which I am not attacking now, as I have never read it. But the stage of a survey calls with me the setting of data. What data? What was filtered? How was it collected? What nations participated? Indonesia has around 277.5 million people, how many does its media (online and other) have? Simple questions really. 

When we dig into the matter, we see “Middle Eastern countries recognise the potential of the creative economy. In the region, the intersection of the digital and creative industries, in particular — encompassing the use of artificial intelligence (AI), Web3, and virtual reality — is driving innovation and economic diversification.” I still shiver at the notion that AI does not yet exist, no matter how many players boom the bubble of the AI vibe, it does not yet exist and we need to take notice of this. It might be fuelling the desire for it to be here, but it isn’t and when the world starts wondering the simple equation of “LLM’s vs AI” and true data parsing, its verification process and programmers with its algorithms the statement “According to a white paper by Dubai Design District and Dubai Media City, the global digital creative economy could grow by 11 percent annually, reaching a staggering AED27 trillion by 2030.” I fear for the fallout it precedes. And like the other papers the question of population, collection and reading the data will get a much higher priority. I winder how certain power players will address and respond to “a staggering AED27 trillion by 2030”, you see, joy of a revenue is nice, but the fear of it falling short in 5 years will be on the forefront of nearly every mind who depended on this fuelling stage. 

There is a side I fully agree with. It is seen in “In November, Dubai Media City underscored the essential role of multicultural creativity at this year’s Global Media Congress held in ADNEC Center Abu Dhabi.” I believe that true creativity can only be seen in a multicultural setting as such the UAE has a jump on all other nations as I personally see it and even as I shiver at the 40,500 setting (I am not debating or attacking it) I understand that my script had very little chance to begin with. I am still proud I wrote it and there are three more coming (not with Islamic values in mind), but that is the state of the world. Creativity is where our thoughts take us. And we respond as we would or as we can. The first one was islamic in nature, but that doesn’t mean all will be and multicultural is the first step of being truly creative. What matters to me are a few things and the stage of the numbers is one, articles rarely spell that out and as such it becomes my setting that I wish I knew more of UNCTAD and their numbers, because it is at the heart of the matter here. And here is the spiller (or killer). You see, the UN Trade and Development has a UNCTADstat Data centre. I took a look (at https://unctadstat.unctad.org/datacentre/) where I found “International trade in creative services: estimates for individual economies” an experimental part that has data from 2010 to 2018 and shows us Saudi Arabia, but not the United Arab Emirates (UAE), as such I wonder where the numbers are coming from. The article does not give us that part. I saw the Creative Economy Outlook 2024. The word ‘Statistics’ is given to us 23 times, and always with references like {Key Statistics and Trends in Trade Policy 2022. UNCTAD/DITC/TAB/2023/2. Geneva.} Yet the report gives us no real numbers (like raw data) or the reference to raw data has exactly 0 hits. As such I tend to have a more skeptical view on such a presentation. As such when ‘confirming’ the survey, I see another ‘hitch’ the fact that the phrase ‘in countries where data is available’ is missing from the article. It happens, but as I see it, it is kinda sloppy. With the rather large setting shown (in the UN pdf) that we see “inputs received through the 2024 UNCTAD Survey on the Creative Economy from the following countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Benin, Cambodia, China, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guatemala, Indonesia, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Seychelles, Slovenia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uzbekistan and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.” And here we get the other shoe dropped. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are not mentioned at all. This is not on these countries, but as I see it The editorial of the Middle East economy has a little explaining to do (as I personally see it), it might be merely semantics, but that is at times how I roll.

And there is more on the graphics, one pie chart merely shows Saudi Arabia and the UAE as part of the EMEA region, as such I wonder which part of the 21% is Europe, because that sets a much larger premise of advertisement per region and population. There is no real way that Saudi Arabia and the UAE can compete in advertising against a population of 742 million europeans. As such I start to develop questions (as I would).

Well that was it for now, I’ll add the United Nations PDF at the bottom, it took me less than 10 minutes to scope out the questions you see here and if I took a little more time I will find a lot more. But that is the setting of a political brief (as I see it), I also didn’t see (I might have missed that) on the definition of the media and what sources are set to what medium. You see, there is a chart on Global video games revenues, and predictively set (based on data) this is always an upward spiral because there are no sources (or data) available for the Playstation 6, the Nintendo Switch 2, or the Tencent handheld. They are the tomorrow systems and there is no data on any of that a present. But the larger audiences are already looking into these parts. So what gives on the data?

A mere simple question that has no easy answer, I get that, because presumption is always on what is known, but take the simple setting in 2012 the PS4 was released. It got more than 50 million consoles out and obliterated the Microsoft product. In 2016 Microsoft merely gave us all Xbox live numbers. So when we see that, what numbers does UNCTAD have to set the Total video games revenue from 225 to 312 billion and Video games advertising from 75 to 137 billion between 2023 and 2027? A lot higher than Traditional games which went from 55 to 62 billion? The numbers do not reflect each other. As you might guess that sets gaming in a dead drop against advertisement, a bad business practice as I personally see it. And I could go on but when you see it was a forecast based on PwC’s Global Entertainment and Media Outlook 2023-2027 (so based on what numbers?) This is merely what I found in under an hour. As such question all numbers that have no accompanying response setting (aka N). 

Also when we get the Countries with the most significant art markets by value of sales in 2023 and we see USA, France, UK, China and other with France at 7% and other at 15%, where do the UAE and Saudi Arabia end up? Consider that a place with 40,500 members do not surpass France and are part of the 15% What is the setting for them? I wonder if the Middle East Economy had those questions in mind when they released that story. As I see it a simple question really.

1416030-ENDownload

Have a great Monday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Politics

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

December 15, 2024 · 17:39

What is it?

You know the setting that came (if I remember correctly) from the original TV-series ‘The Untouchables. The start was always “the names have been changed to protect the innocent”, what if it becomes “The names have been changed for the progression of greed”? As such we get:

It was a dark and gloomy night (a lousy start to be sure). There was a table. At that table were 5 man. His name was M Rerolls, he was heading a meeting with the others. The setting was the progression of advertising. As he saw it, every person should be able to be advertised to. But one organisation was impeding this progress. The makers of this console solution had bounced Microsoft and others and now that the Amazon Crescent was gaining more than 200 million gamers, the essential revenue from that medium was expected to be massive, more so then any other console. As such mr. Rerolls had another stage, the stage of pressure and social media pressures through fake accounts and hyping. Within 2 months the console went overboard and advertisings were introduced. Mr. Rerolls was pleased. Millions more in the bank thins month alone. Life was good.

On the other setting, the people in charge of the console decided that this pressure was more then undesirable and they made plans. But there was no easy way to do this. As such they went back to the maker of the solution and decided to leave it with him. 

The man brooded and brooded for a week to see how this setting could be disabled and then on the 8th day, when eating a sandwich on his balcony a thought emerged. The man considered a few items and decided to get to work. 

He started simple, he looked into the cookie system. It was the building block of advertising and as such it would be their undoing. And as he set it out, it would be near impossible to track, the better setting was that consoles were near impervious and he dud everything to give Nintendo and Sony a pass on that system. Crescent would be the infectors of others and when the system was shutdown it would all be purged from the machine. A near perfect solution.

It was inefficient to transport the worm, virus or hotkeys. But building them with advertising would be simple and the larger goal would be served. As such he took a page from the books of the series of Bones and set it all in motion. 

As he saw it the ‘simplicity’ of the data-cbid was that it was a counter (a Cookiebot Domain Group ID), but it could be more, much more and it would take the people a long time to figure out what was going on. He had a similar old fashioned idea in the 80’s. It was a different idea, but the same principle. 

He started the design of several data viruses and cut them into small pieces he needed 56 bytes to set the story in motion and another 128 bytes to give it direction. The 128 bytes could be embedded into the system cash, the 56 bytes in 3 data-cbid’s and that set the advertisement system into a new creator of malware victims. 

The idea was set into another approach towards direction and segments. The cbid parts were the location, the the direction was part of the algorithm and the third part was the conundrum, as he was contemplating this, he thought of a advertisement demo. It was clear that the advertisement was intelligent, measuring and responding to the advertised party. It gave him the parts he needed. As such the three parts were independent and they did not connect to each other and the advertisement used it all, but there were no connections and no connections were made. 

As he saw it, it would take a setting that is larger then the simple code. He created three parts, the first part will attach the codes if a certain advertisement was shown. He had a few friends and to add an advertisement was easy, the setting was to add a dozen campaigns all working kinda the same, but all handing different cbid’s there were three code parts, in the id number, the second sequence had the part number. 0000 became sequence with an added 01, 02 or 03. As such there were 150 cbid’s spread over difference advertisers and in part the idea was that until the three sequences align, nothing happens. When they align because the three are shown in one sitting and the code is completed. The randomness of it all will not allow it to be found easily and it will set the difficulty of finding the problem to almost impossible. The advertisements will connect the work, virus or malbot to anyone that computer, tablet or mobile cold connect to and when the device reboots, the stage resets and it all starts over again. As defined, the right to be advertised to will result in the world of Mr. Rerolls to be deleted, how nice. Killed by his own advertisement system and the solution will be outstanding for the longest of time. 

This was a simple story, I am all about the stories and about the settings of an RPG. In that setting you cannot have a one track mind and as I see it the people forcing us into advertisements for the need of greed, need to be stopped. I am not against advertisements, I am against forcing it down our throats, which is why some of the IP I created will not allow advertisements and that is how I see it. Some will be fine with it, others are not (the greedy people). And I created this setting to fight the overwhelming setting of greed.

And I needed a hobby for this Sunday. What is more lovely than to create an offset to ‘Microsoft’s ad revenues surge 19% in latest quarter’ with this? So do I mind that they recorded Revenues were $64.7 billion, Net income was $22 billion. No, I do not. It is wrong to okay Google and say it is wrong for Microsoft to make that penny. I believe that it is wrong to force it down out throats. That where marketeers come into play. And they must be stopped, their hinger for advertising is insatiable and my idea stops it to some extent. When the world does something to stop insatiable greed we will have a chance, but I won’t hold my breath. So my creative mind selected an idea to stop them. Creativity yay. 

Have a lovely day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science, Stories

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

November 25, 2024 · 18:22

Marketing sidestep

The day before yesterday I was given a mini-can of a Walovi tea as a trinket as well as a can of Walovi tea. The tea was slightly too sweet, but the taste was otherwise good. I liked it. I put the little knick knack on my keyring and that was it. Today I amended to the idea to make it a little more of a real device that people will like and put on their desk. A functioning thing that could be bought and people will pay for something that is good. Even if it costs a few dollars. 

Now consider it not merely a simple toy, but something functioning. Consider the following. The mini can is set with the following.

A battery so that wireless connections are possible it has a charge point at the bottom through USB-C and at the top

A switch looking like a soda can lid so you can switch the device off. When rotated on, there will be two connections. A SD card and a Micro SD card. Now you think that it is out there, but you would be wrong. I have looked and I cannot find anything like this and even as I set this as a Coca Cola can. It could just as easily be a Pepsi can. Bottle shaped like a soda brand or a beer can, the can could be a beer too and this would see a massive level of visibility. So why didn’t anyone grasp that option? There is enough out there to see the the futility of some marketing attempts. So why am I the one looking at this and are others not even close to this? Then there are the options. The battery and WiFi connector could be optional making it a simple SD card reader and none of those seem to be around either. So what are the marketing boffins doing? Why are they not ahead of me? I can think of Coca Cola, Pepsi Cola, Heineken, Vita Coco Company, Asahi Group Holdings, Anheuser-Busch InBev and no one with these billions of dollars thought of this? Perhaps they did and they rejected the idea. Yet nowadays, we have mobiles, laptops, netbooks, consoles and tablets. All relying on WiFi for connectivity. So what was keeping them?

Just a question to put out in the open. So have a wonderful day and don’t let creativity stop you from making a wild idea out in the open. Look at what is out there and see what could be in every living room and office for all to see. So what kept them in the first place?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

November 20, 2024 · 18:43

Puzzlement

That happens and it does not matter how bright you are. At times you get the message and it makes no sense (at that moment). I had that yesterday with an article by Fortune (at https://fortune.com/2024/11/17/luxury-goods-lvmh-kering-bain-broken-promises/) we get ‘50 million people have stopped buying luxury brands like Dior and Burberry after ‘broken promises’ to customers’. The first question that pops into my head was ‘How do they get to these numbers?’, lets be clear I am not accusing anyone of anything. Yet that gives us the 100% of Tokyo and Sao Paulo together. To collect that amount of data requires a mind boggling amount of data. I lost track to the article as Fortune hides behind a paywall and I am not that stupid to fall for the ‘disaster’ sales technique. The article gives us brands like Burberry and Dior. As such Simple questions become apparent. 

What form of verification was used?
Data in itself is the biggest liar of all. A simple mistake of cleaning and verifying the data is essential. Example is the question ‘Are you pregnant?’ Is a nice one, when the men are not cleaned out of this setting we get an astounding 50% offset (if we are lucky). The man (always trying to be funny) will answer no, because it is the truth. 

Then we get the broken promises. 

What evidence is there?
I get that Fortune gives us “On some level, brands have broken their promises to consumers” the voice (read: writing) of Marie Driscoll an equity partner. So what evidence are we given. The to some degree aggregated setting gives us LVMH, Burberry and Kering. There is a mention that they missed revenue targets. And suddenly we see that they are surpassed by Ozempic (a Pharma solution). We see not mention of any broken promises. We see all kinds of excuses and no actual mention of broken promises. At best we get the term brand fatigue. Actually I made mention of this in an article in January 2024 called ‘That one sided conversation’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/01/27/that-one-sided-conversation/) my issue is that malls (and brands) need to set their focus to engagement. I even created the setting to do just that And I had the Toronto Eaton Centre as an example as well as the Dubai Mall (and a few other places in Dubai). I never considered broken promises, and as I see it Fortune has no real setting for that either. If you have 50,000,000 consumers. You have data. Whether the consumer told a porky pie (read: lie) or there is another reason like they ran out of cash. The simple setting is data and the article does not give us any. The article is (as I personally see it) a sham. We are given “an equity Analyst told Fortune” the name appears later. Yet, if I had this to say you mention that name EVERYWHERE. And the article goes one step further “Now 50 million luxury consumers have either ditched buying designer bag, scarves, watches and more — or have been priced out, Bain & company’s new annual luxury report warns”

I personally believe that LVMH, Burberry, Gucci (et all) need to demand that data from Fortune. I wonder how long I need to shift through that data to see an astounding amount of gaps that could get Fortune into hot waters? 

I got to see the article in my mobile, but not my laptop (another fine mess I got myself into). 

In these troubled times I have no issue with missed revenue targets and I feel certain that their investors do not have that issue either. The very rich know how they are doing and for the most they also know that of their peers. So if only 2 get their numbers that quarter, they are certain that about 80% will not go shopping everywhere. Optionally they will push back their Burberry suit or dress. There is no shame as I personally see it (and for the record I have never had enough money for a Burberry suit). 

As such my puzzlement. Fortune was always seen by me as a straight error in ‘reporting’ and this article basically threw their credibility in the trashcan.

The Second sight
That comes from the reference to Bain and Company and the stage that was referred to. The headline there was ‘Global luxury spending to land near €1.5 trillion in 2024, remaining relatively flat as consumers prioritise experiences over products amid uncertainty’ an article by Claudia D’Arpizio and Federica Levato. There we see “And yet, 50 million luxury consumers have either opted out of the luxury goods market or been forced out of it in the last two years. This is a signal for brands that it’s time to readjust their value propositions. To win back customers, particularly the younger ones, brands will need to lead with creativity and expand conversation topics. Simultaneously, they must keep their top customers front and center, surprising and delighting them while rediscovering one-to-one human interactions. For all customers, it will be critical to double down on personalisation, leveraging technology to achieve it at scale.” That is a view I can get behind and there is no mention at all of ‘Broken Promises’ (anywhere in the article). These two youthful young sprouts basically confirms my believes that it is about engagement. It does not matter how (I personally chose a generic setting) to engage the consumers in a much larger setting of a place and not a specific brand. I do not disagree with “rediscovering one-to-one human interactions” but as a technologist I prefer my Chicken Shawarma in a one to many configuration. And I do get that to address the very wealthy (aka filthy rich), a one on one setting is likely preferable. But that was never the reason for the IP I created in that setting.

And I for one personally believe that you can ditch the Fortune story and go straight for Bain & Company (at https://www.bain.com/about/media-center/press-releases/2024/global-luxury-spending-to-land-near-1.5-trillion-in-2024-remaining-relatively-flat-as-consumers-prioritize-experiences-over-products-amid-uncertainty/) the article is quite remarkable. And it was a pleasure to read too. I get that the numbers game can be nerdy and dry, but this story is uplifting and a good thought to address, for anyone in retail that is.

In the end what did Fortune do? Very little, all praise to Bain & Company here.

Have a great day all.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

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

November 19, 2024 · 22:36

The Christmas sphere

Yup, we all go there, there is no holding us. Still it is not a setting that I would have guessed that the Republicans would enter (perhaps a small oversight on my part). It started on the October 9th 2024 when I wrote ‘Personal Perception’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/10/09/personal-perception/). Today, one of the coolest dudes I know from Uni (Thanks Yoshi) brought this to my attention (at https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/18/24300033/doj-google-monopoly-remedies-search-chrome-android-ai) where the Verge are giving us: ‘US lawyers will reportedly try to force Google to sell Chrome and unbundle Android’. Let me give you a small education. It happens in sports and n business. In uncertain times you keep your strongest players strong (example the Toronto Maple Leafs) and your businesses in pretty much the same order. As such there is an upside to all this (sort of). For Huawei Christmas comes early, as such, I personally believe It is up to Ren Zhengfei to get Merrick Garland (Attorney General of the United States) the hamper of all hampers this Christmas. (See below)

Fair is fair I think. With this sentiment the DoJ will hand mobile supremacy to Huawei and SymphonyOS on pretty much a global level. We are given (in the Verge) “Bloomberg reports that DOJ lawyers will try to break up Google’s search monopoly by targeting Chrome, Android, and AI Overviews.” And the supporting text “The Department of Justice is planning to ask for Google’s antitrust trial judge to force the company to sell off its Chrome browser after the judge ruled the company has maintained an illegal search monopoly, reports Bloomberg.”. It comes down to “Don’t underestimate the woke opponent population to destroy your their own army for you” It is the one reason Sun Tsu forgot to teach his generals among him (the silly bunny). 

As Google gets slammed left, right and in front of them by self centred greedy minded people We need to come to an understanding that Merrick Garland gave China the best Christmas present ever. In the first they took a slippery situation in 2019 to take resources and create Harmony OS and now it is its own solution away from Android and at present is available in 77 language for all 64-bit ARM, x86-64, RISC-V, LinxiISA systems. It is about the solution for smart systems and now as Google is about to be hobbled by its own justice system, the one global solution for nearly all parties. It is the one system that Apple feared, and it was partially secure knowing that Google could counter whatever Huawei could bring. That advantage is about to be gone. Ren Zhengfei had nothing to do but to await the American woke powers to be to become this stupid. And in the end the only America basically cut its own wrists right before the price fight. And that is merely part of it. You see our protection was “Finally, they will reportedly push for “a ban on the type of exclusive contracts that were at the center of the case against Google.”” You see it was not for Google, it was for the consumer who relied on stability and protection from the dangers in the mobile worlds, the scammers. I reckon that by 2026 the world needs to become aware of the scammer danger and by 2026 they get more easy access to mobile users all over the world. Google was our protection and I reckon that 2026 will become the year of Huawei (2025 might be a little too soon). And that also reverberates all over the Middle East. A more clear example is given by “In total, we estimate Google’s products support between 4.3 and 10.5 SAR billion a year in economic activity. Over the last five years, the economic activity driven by Google Search and Ads has grown by 189% in nominal terms” (source: anonymous, the mouse we all adore). With this as well as “Google launched a cloud region in Saudi Arabia in November 2023, located in Dammam. The company had been in discussions with Saudi oil firm Aramco about a data center joint venture since early 2018, and plans for a GCP region in Saudi were officially announced in late 2020” If Huawei gets to show pockets of inconsistency (something the DoJ is about to deliver) Google will have a much harder time and with that part out in the open Huawei will get almost easy access to the United Arab Emirates as well. Yup, that was what the DoJ accomplished, all for the good of Huawei. Suck to be radical and woke, doesn’t it?

In addition Bloomberg gave us “Google’s regulatory affairs VP, Lee-Anne Mulholland, said that the DOJ “continues to push a radical agenda that goes far beyond the legal issues in this case,”” gives me the sentiment that Lee-Anne Mulholland underestimated the ego of any woke mind to fumble a technology war. In other news, today I made a desperate attempt to something else and it brought me to the Canadian Consulate (in Sydny, a joke the Canadians will get). It was the most awesome experience ever. Never ever was I so happy to go to any Consulate, I actually left that place with the Christmas cheer in my heart. It took hours to make that feeling fade. 

So don’t think that I am all business (OK, I am all business at present). 

What does one have to do with the other? Nothing really, I just wanted to give you that Christmas cheer can be found in the most uncommon corners of the Universe (In this case in Australia).

So when you consider that the DoJ is pushing a radical agenda you need to consider why and more precise who does it profit. Because it is not the consumer and it is not Google. So consider that these actions are not seen in 2000 with Microsoft and with “the Circuit Court did not overturn Jackson’s findings of fact, and held that traditional antitrust analysis was not equipped to consider software-related practices like browser tie-ins”, now the setting changes. With this they enable Huawei to grab supremacy in all kinds of legal ways and it seemingly will hurt Google. So at that point what do you think will happen to Merrick Garland and his minions?  In those years Microsoft could play the games they did and now They are faced with Huawei and Tencent Holdings Ltd. And in this Pony Ma (Tencent) and Ren Zhengfei (Huawei) are about to get access to 1.8 billion consumers in a move that Google was unable to get. How is that for competitive laws? 

I reckon that the dust will settle around 2028 and the American ago will have to lick its wounds from that. Stupidity is about to end technological supremacy. I reckon they would have called me crazy around 2000. We only have to wait for the political ego to crush their own marbles. What a day.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

October 30, 2024 · 14:47

The greed driven protocols

There is a setting that I had forgotten about and I was reminded of this by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gzp7y8e7vo) in here we see the headline ‘JP Morgan sues customers over viral TikTok cheque fraud’. To help you with this setting I take you back to 1981. I was in the draught army (pun intended) and like any teenager on a short budget I sometimes ran out of budget in week 3. Now when you had a postal account there was a nice trick. You had a postal cheque which could be cashed in for $500, no questions asked. Now this goes against your balance no matter how slim it was, as such you always had access to $500. As such in times in the last week you cashed it in without having a good balance and you started the month with minus something and then the wage came in setting you in the plus. Is you plan it nicely you could spread that minus over two months setting you in the clear. It wasn’t a great way, but when the numbers are aligned against you it was a solution. The interest was really low in those days, so it would set you back less then $2. All this happened in 1981, 43 years ago. So now we get “US banking giant JP Morgan Chase, is suing customers who allegedly took advantage of a glitch by illegally withdrawing thousands of dollars from its ATMs. The “infinite money glitch”, as it became known on TikTok, allowed the bank’s customers to write a large cheque to themselves, deposit it and then withdraw the funds before the cheque bounced.” OK, this had a little setting that people rote cheques to themselves and withdrew it before the option crashed. Then we get “Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported that JP Morgan Chase closed the loophole a few days after several videos telling people about the glitch went viral on social media.” Is it really? I used the $500 option in the Netherlands 43 years ago as such, how did the loophole get created in the first place? As I see it this is all about greed driven protocols, protocols the negate certain timestamps, and now JP Morgan is crying fowl? Yes, another pun intended. And If I can recollect this setting, so can others. Is it fraud? That is the question. You see fraud is states as “wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain”. The wrongful or criminal deception is key. Were people allowed to write a check to themselves? If that is legally allowed the fraud fails. There is a financial gain, yet if these people claim that they were going to pay it back the fraud is wobbly at best. In the ned it is for a judge to decide if the case can be made. Yet even as I accepted what I did in 1981, there was never a step of personal or financial gain. I merely ‘allowed’ my account to be over-drafted for no more than a month and the maximum amount ‘borrowed’ would have been $500 for the best part of a week. As such the fraud setting becomes debatable but it hangs on the setting if a cheque can be written to ones self. 

As for the amount we are given “The amount of money kept by the defendants in the four lawsuits totalled more than $660,000, according to JP Morgan Chase’s lawyers” as such I wonder what other protocols (or better stated policies) were ‘glitched’ to make for easy money making by the banks. The fact that they are now turned against them is to some extent hilarious. The simplest setting is that you cannot write yourself a cheque for any amount. One simple rule that could have stopped JP Morgan Chase ‘losing’ money as I see it.

I might be wrong on this as I am not a banker. I asked Francesco di Medici and he agrees, but he reeled at the idea of a piece of paper supporting $660,000 so there is that too.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

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

October 29, 2024 · 15:28

Laughing Out Loud

Yup this happens too and in this case it was an article that Bloomberg showed its paying customers. I am not one of them. As such I am attaching the image that made me laugh.

I saw it about 8-10 hours ago and it had me rolling with laughter. So what gives? First the setting of ‘Consider Re-entering’ as I see it Barclays and other banks are strapped for capital and bleeding a client dry (service fees and commissions) is a tell tale story towards any bank trying to make a living. There is no consideration, there is merely the trap they put themselves in 10 years ago. As for the “capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets” is even more hilarious. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has options to consider HSBC, JP Morgan, Bank of America and the 5 largest banks in China. All stronger and more able than Barclays. There is also Credit Agricole and the Citigroup. All in the top 12, Barclays stands at 18. So there is the first part. In addition I can hand you Rothschild & Co. The one bank no one mentions. It’s value was around €18.1 billion a year ago, as such I reckon it is pushing well over €20 billion at present. Barclays has nowhere near that capital or those connections. I reckon that Rothschild can access around 20% more clients than Barclays can (a casual speculation by little old me). 

So why this action?
Well it started in 2012 when we were given “Barclays is fined for manipulating the benchmark Libor interest rate in 2012, after revelations stretching back to 2005” It’s CEO C. S. Venkatakrishnan didn’t forget about that, did he? Then we get 2014 when Reuters gave us ‘Barclays sued by Saudi developer for $10 billion’, so how did that end? We got “A Saudi real estate company has sued Barclays for $10 billion (6.24 billion pounds), claiming the bank ceased pursuing lease payments due from the Saudi government on military complexes in the kingdom in order to obtain a lucrative banking license there” when we were given (source: Reuters) “The company, Jadawel International, a unit of London-based MBI International Holdings Inc., claims Barclays “hatched a fraudulent scheme” to secure the rare Saudi banking license, selling out Jadawel in the process, according to the lawsuit filed in New York state Supreme Court on Tuesday” One says potato and the other claims tomato. In the end as far as I can tell Barclays won the dismissal. It doesn’t make them innocent, but the claimant could not prove guilt (as far as I can tell). And last but not least only this year we were given that Barclay was one of the players in getting Andrea Orcel “derivatives linked to Commerzbank for the Italian lender in the weeks before Berlin sold a stake earlier this month, sources familiar with the matter said. Barclays and Bank of America subsequently helped Orcel to effectively expand UniCredit’s holding in Commerzbank to the current level of about 21 per cent, they said asking not to be named discussing the private information” now, this last bit does not seem to be illegal, but the stakes against Barclay (all over Europe) are increasingly high and now they hope that Saudi Arabia gives them a chunk of business before they are forced to hand over their bank to any of the upper 15 banks. I say good luck to them. Yes there is all kinds of banking issues I am not familiar with, but governments need to work with banks that are cleaner then clean and as such I am entertaining howls of deriving laughter if Barclay thinks they are that. The LIBOR scandal took care of that. 

And lets be clear Barclay didn’t (as far as I know) hand the statement “Mistakes were made in the past and we have sanitised our structures and people to meet the challenge that a customer the size of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia brings”, nope, none of that. We were given “Barclay plc is considering re-entering Saudi Arabia as it looks to capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets”. I actually wonder if they would be allowed in the country at present. There are seemingly better viable candidates and that is before you consider Rothschild as a contender. 

I get it. I also tried to access Saudi Arabia as a partner (read: future owner) of my IP. I merely wanted 50 million, a Canadian passport and 2% of the revenue for 20 years. With my believe (a presented believe) that the idea would give them 6 billion annual and their investment to that would be 50 million (for happy old me). And this is about as decent as it gets. A mere 0.8% risk and that is at the time of the presentation. A mere trivial amount and I feel certain that this would have worked. There was one condition Microsoft was not allowed near it. Amazon would be OK, but Microsoft is a no go.

This is why I contacted Kingdom Holdings and Tencent Technology as well. They can drive the innovation I brought. As such I feel a stronger contender than Barclay ever could be (Yes, I am blowing my own horn).

So as I see it, re-entering a market when the others have seemingly had enough of you isn’t re-entering. It is running for the hills to avoid being taken over. But I am not a banking person, so what do I know.

Have a fun day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

October 13, 2024 · 18:01

What is real?

That is at times the question. There was an image on LinkedIn (see below) and I had taken notice of it. Yet today on LinkedIn we were given a rather large recruiting drive which seems odd, but it doesn’t need to be. The line “Amazon plans to cut 14,000 manager positions by 2025” directly opposes the recruitment drive on which 150 people applied for (as a presented fact).

We see all the big boys dumping staff around 120,000 of them and the others are planning to dump a significant amount of people (numbers unknown). One of them I know ‘personally’, it is the Swedish telecom company Telia. We were given a month ago “Swedish carrier Telia is set to cut 3,000 jobs this year as part of cost reduction measures. The proposed cuts would equate to around 15 percent of its workforce, and deliver annual savings of 2.6 billion Swedish crowns ($253 million), the operator said today (September 4)” the larger issue is not that they are dwindling down staff, a 15% decrease is significant. It is the other side of the coin that I cannot see at the moment. That 15% might be all over the place, but the turnover is that a company with 15% less staff tends to have issues all over the board. Perhaps it works out, perhaps not. But the issue that I see with 3,000 persons saving them 2.6 billion Swedish crowns is a more significant issue. You see that amounts to a personal saving of 866K per person and no one in Sweden makes that much (well almost no one) this means that Telia is downsizing a lot, as such we need to take a look at “As of 2023, the company had a market share of roughly 31.5 percent” This implies (implied does not mean factual) that Telia is downsizing a few more branches and that now leads us to a much larger setting. Another source on this gives us “I envisage that this intended approach will not only result in a Telia that is simpler and faster in decision-making and commercial execution, but also help us to grow our business and generate enough cash so that we can make necessary investments and cover our dividend, as we remain committed to our dividend policy” I feel uneasy on this. Especially the statement “we remain committed to our dividend policy”, now this might (and likely is) merely me, but it could also mean that Sweden is ripe for players like STC (Saudi Telecom Company) and Huawei (Ren Zhengfei) to take up the baton to wave a much larger change in Europe. I expect that Huawei might show links to China Telecom (a speculation, not a fact). You see, as these companies all dwindle down, these staff members (requiring a job) might be a nice niche for these two players. Saudi’s STC is already in Europe “Saudi Telecommunication Company’s subsidiary TAWAL officially began operations in Europe in August of that year. In September 2023, it was announced STC Group had acquired a 9.9% stake in the Madrid-headquartered multinational telecommunications company, Telefónica, S.A..” When you consider this stage, and Sweden is the next target, Finland and Norway are not far away. I saw some data on STC entering Slovenia (might have been Slovakia) and that puts the option of Poland on the table, at that point Saudi Arabia has a clear path from the South of Europe all to the far north. And with that on the road, Huawei will have negated a much larger win, it took them some time but with this in place America is out of the race in Europe. All that bantering of fear mongers (never showing any evidence) and now these players will succumb to a much larger setting. Mind you, I am speculating. I have no evidence of this. And when we consider that IBM and Cisco are also on the list, the internet overhaul could become a lot larger. We say ‘it won’t get this far’ but the stage where they could be replaced by other players There is a Chinese version of Cisco (not sure how that words), but the stage becomes that Huawei and STC would have a clear path taking over servicing the European population of 449 million people in the EU. It is what I would attempt to do and America losing 120,000 people to ‘streamlining’ businesses will not help. So what happens next? Well if this impacts Telecom in Europe, especially a well maintained network, America will lose more and more and now they have no data to look into, that implies that Google, Meta and Microsoft will get less data and that will hinder their actions in the long run as well, especially as the Department of Justice is seeking to slice and dice Google. In that setting Huawei and their Harmony OS NEXT will get a great option and as that vibrates through the Middle East and Asia, Huawei will get the sweetest revenge on America to start. In this setting (as I personally see it) Germany and France will soon count the chickens they have and the eggs coming from this setting. I feel that Germany will turn first, but that might merely be my view on the matter. 

What is a given is that this is merely a setting as I see it (optionally very wrong), but as Saudi Arabia via BRICS makes more inroads into Europe, America will essentially lose these income streams. And that is the beginning of the end for America and its $35,000,000,000,000 debt. There is every consideration that more then 20% loss of revenue implies that America can no longer pay the interest bill. A setting I saw coming a mile away (5 years ago), so I do not see any hindrance to this scenario (which doesn’t make it correct).

And in all this China is seeking ‘revenge’ on the accusations America spouted and Saudi Arabia is aiming to become a technology hub and they are well underway to make that so.

So in this day and age of redundancies, there is a larger group of people almost desperate to find a new gig and there these two players can find all kinds of people ready and willing to give their new employer the best that they had. Will it be so? Time will tell. 

I want to congratulate Vancouver as they join us on this Sunday and the rest on having an equally fine day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

October 8, 2024 · 23:53

Making money

Yup, you can make money in three ways. You create it, you steal it, or you can make the government reimburse you. The third one is one that has its own risks. Yet the BBC informs us ‘Customers of failed crypto firm FTX set for refunds’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0qz3dg21vqo) Where we are given “Creditors of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX are poised to receive up to $16.5bn (£12.6bn) under a bankruptcy plan approved in the US on Monday.” And we get more with “Last year, former boss Sam Bankman-Fried was convicted of stealing customer funds ahead of the collapse and later sentenced to 25 years in prison. The deal will allow former customers to recover a sum worth about 119% of what they had in their accounts at the time of bankruptcy, according to FTX.” As such it seems that these customers get 19% on top of what they had in their accounts. There are ups and downs. We are also given “Some have suggested the repayment in cash will not match the loss of crypto holdings that would be worth far more today had they not been stolen. The value of bitcoin has more than tripled since November 2022.” As such I would surmise that someone went shopping with an approximate 180% of the total of sums. As the outstanding bill was set to “$8bn in customer funds were reported missing, not including debts to investors and others. Mr Ray’s team has since recovered assets worth $14.7-$16.5bn” As such 8 billion was found missing, Roughly double was retrieved and these customers only get 119%? I think there is a stinky fishy smell coming from the realm of banks. They might small consolation that Sam Bankman-Fried is convicted to 9125 days in Hotel Sing-Sing, but that might be merely the impression some feel. You see, the larger premise might be that we are given “the approval of the plan was a “significant milestone” in the firm’s efforts to repay the money to people and firms in more than 200 jurisdictions around the world” but the underlying issue that the BBC seems to ‘ignore’ is that people like Elisabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried (aka SBM) are given way to much leeway. Holmes was given 11 years imprisonment, where the Guardian on May 8th gave us that her sentence was reduced by two years and four months before original date. As such her sentence is reduced by almost 20%, so what reductions is SBM looking forward to? If is is a similar 20%, he could be out by 2044 and if he plays nice (good behaviour) he might be out even sooner that that. As such we might surmise that crime pays nowadays. And the media will milk these two for whatever they can be milked for. 

Enjoy the day ahead of you.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,