Tag Archives: Randy Lennox

A delusion within a delusion

A few things happened today that gave pause for thoughts. I believe it that it reinforces the ideas I had from the very start. Some (especially Microsoft sycophants) will state that it is exactly the evidence making me delusional. I will let you decide.

To state this I will take some detours. The setting I always had was that by the time phase one was completed, 50 million subscribers would be added. A few parts support that media, yet I will not mention them here due to some sycophants. What you need to know is how I got there.

So there is the setting that three and three and three make nine. I state that it could be 729. So how did I get here. Well, (3×3)3 is the quick route. But that would be regarded by most as flim flam numerology. So how did I get there?  

Consider two persons, person A and person B. They both have 4 million followers. You would think that you get to 8 million which makes sense, but you would be wrong. Consider these two persons. They both have interests and for the simplicity we will take random groups. Fashion, Books, Technology and Art. In these classifications they can attract each 2 people. As such the equation now becomes 2+2+2+2 times 8 million. We now have 64 million. There will be overlap, yet the more diverse these groups are, the lesser the overlap. It is a little bit like anti clustering. New clusters that are similar but not alike. This (sort of) relates to Späth, H.: Cluster dissection and analysis: theory (1986). Another person who talked about this was Iliya Valev (around 1998). 

Now I have to make a side jump. It is an old setting for a tri-sided dagger, or a Jagdkommando knife. The response on it is “The tri-dagger’s problems all begin with that godforsaken twist. It lacks a proper cutting edge, and it’s wide shape means that, as a slashing weapon, this thing is about one step up from paper cuts”, so how does this connect? Well, I have always ben a fan of a tri sided blade. It is forbidden as an actual weapon, but in my view I see it as something with three sides. Presentation, Perception and Principle. They support and reinforce one another. Perception is reinforced by Principle and Presentation, Presentation by Perception and Principle and Principle gets support from Perception and Presentation. No matter how you wield it. We see the opposition we read earlier, but we see it as a knife. You need to realise that the origins of the stiletto was invented in the 15th century to be an anti-armour knife. Not meant to slice but to stab and it went straight through leather and most metal armour. The ‘recipient’ basically bled to death on the spot. Now, hindered by its own armour it could not get any bandage applied before he bled to death. The jagdkommando knife is similar, the wound becomes to hard to heal or apply first aid, which was why it was forbidden. But the application of it is still valid. It was meant to kill with certainty, plain and simple.

Out of bounds
This is exactly why I never wanted Microsoft to get involved. They can spin whatever they like, and as they waste 69 billion on some call of duty solution, I am in the process of taking their population away from them. You see, you can spin innovation, but when the results are absent. You become part of the problem. This is supported by two part. In the first part one source gave me that 75% of the Xbox population is the Xbox series S, as such they already lack next generation solutions. The second one is harder. This was seen two days ago (at https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/20/investing/premarket-stocks-trading/index.html) where we are given ‘US debt rises to $33 trillion as government shutdown looms’, we know there will be some last minute ‘solution’ but that is now becoming increasingly less and less likely. Microsoft has a system that ‘thrives’ on US government and its allies and that is a massive chunk of its business. So when that machine starts going idle more and more, their goose is cooked. This is why I speculated on a 2026 fall of Microsoft. Google decided on another path, so they are out and Amazon doesn’t seem to be waking up. Now China has three sides of a square nearly ready. The media is happy to spin that this is merely three sides of a heptagon and they too are pretty spiffy on presentations. Yet there I am with the other solution.

Why Canada?
Canada was part of the solution from day one. Even as I had no idea on the impact Microsoft was facing at that point, for the simple reason that I never cared about Microsoft. They merely were. But on the 5th of November 2021 I wrote ‘Egg-timer please’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/11/05/egg-timer-please/) there I wrote about Randy Lennox, CEO of Bell Media. There were two reasons, one he was Canadian (Americans were starting to get a global bad rep), he would not have that against him, which mattered to me to progress my IP. In addition he had sides of a documentarist which would be important for part of my solution and as a CEO he had international access (something I will never have). In addition Canada was a commonwealth nation and as a commonwealthian that mattered to me. 

So why the numbers?
You see, the numbers sound nice, but to get to the 50 million subscriptions I need a acceleration curve, anti clustering shows that acceleration a lot quicker. The simplest example I can give you is the difference between ‘You need to be a biker and you need to be a painter and you need to be a technologist’ and ‘You need to be a biker or you need to be a painter or you need to be a technologist’. It is not that simple, but it shows the difference the quickest. If acceleration is key, the ‘or’ group is the acceleration you need. 

These factor made me realise that Microsoft would never be the solution, they keep on buying and missing the innovation. They will state that they are the innovation that works like an anchor, but the innovation of an anchor is not because it is working, but because it didn’t work and we see plenty of that at Microsoft, but they never improved their models and I spoke about these failures too often to rename them now. Amazon was for the longest time the larger option to get it all done, but they decided not to wake up (I actually gave them the heads up). As such Andy Jassy and Jeff Bezos struck out. Now we have a new option. You see, I considered Apple, but they had their own niche. I respect niche players, but they come with blinkers. That is optionally not a bad thing (as long as they pass the qualifying question) but without that I am giving away the play to them and giving Apple something for nothing is just too unacceptable to me. Hence I contacted the Saudi Government in September 2022, I admit it did not go the way I had hoped, but not all was lost. If the Kingdom Holding group would accept the stage I presented, all would be well (I am still waiting). A new player that reared its head in January 2023 was the Tencent Technology group. They had the drive to make it work, but I believe a lot more could be achieved if Amazon or Apple were part of that deal (and I do prefer to get paid). It was also around that time that the secondary impact became visible. Meta would lose more and more market share and as such, so would Twitter (read ‘X’). Their losses would not be immediate and would take some time, but their granularity would be lost as my IP gains speed. So when these two lose 30 million people it would hurt their bottom dollar to some extent and from there the damage merely increases on a few fields. It was the advantage a player like Amazon could use to really impact global business. 

Mister X
Mister X does not relate in any way to Twitter. I considered the second person in that equation and I suddenly realised that this person could put the media out of business to a larger extent. The media that has been spinning for the need of their stakeholders and advertisers as well as their digital dollars would suddenly lose a massive amount of revenue over the short initial time. They would not be able to correct for this and they would have to bend over backwards to become anyones bitch. That works for me as the media has become a much larger problem and I suddenly realised that this could be used to wield information in a different direction and lets be clear, these two people stand to make a nice slice of the initial $5,000,000,000 annually. And I am not forgetting about little old me, I stand to make a nice retirement fund as well (which was my initial reason). I care more about my IP being successful but that will hand me a very sizeable retirement parachute too. As such I do hope that certain people will see what they are about to get, not in the least CEO Talal Ibrahim Al Maiman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud. The second one doesn’t need the money, but when his royal highness gets to stick it to both the US and the media at the same time, he might do it just for the fun of it. In the meantime I wonder how fast the US shutdown would affect Microsoft. It will not initially do so, but this is the second shutdown danger in as many years and the third is not far behind and when that becomes a threat a third time, the chance of a last minute resort becomes less and less likely. So when the US government shuts down, how will Microsoft receive its cloud revenue? Its 365 revenue? So, how big is the actual Office 365 Government service description? When that shuts down, who pays for the $35 a month, per employee? Did you consider the amount of revenue Microsoft at that point will miss? 

Consider the slippery slope the US is on, consider what they sacrificed for the good of ego and you will realise that I was correct all along, optionally I was correct going all the way back to 2021. 

Enjoy the upcoming weekend.

Leave a comment

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

57 seconds until the next sucker

Yes, I have heralded Meta as the next setting that will bring them billions. That is if they do not screw it up beforehand and the BBC gives us two examples. The first (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-60789802) was given to us last night with the byline ‘Australia sues Facebook over scam ads impersonating celebrities’. In that article we see “The tech giant had engaged in “false, misleading or deceptive conduct” by knowingly hosting the ads for bogus cryptocurrencies, a regulator said. The US company could face financial and other penalties.

Meta is yet to comment but has previously said it is committed to keeping scammers off its platforms.” We are also given “The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) says the ads in question used Facebook’s algorithms to target susceptible users and featured bogus quotes by Australian celebrities.” All elements of deceptive conduct, all because Meta does not properly vet the people advertising, and this is on Meta. There is no excuse, there is no “We need this advertisement to be completed today” that is merely evidence that the advertising party did not properly time manage their project. I have seen decades of stupidity that way, decades of people on the phone “I am on route, I will be there in 5 minutes” all whilst we know that it takes well over 15 minutes to get there. No time management, no proper project management and decades of excuses sees the wrong people enabling stupidity. And now Meta will feel the brung of that impact. And that was merely example one.

In example 2 (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60348334) we are given ‘‘Dangerous’ tanning products promoted by influencers’ influencers are a different story, it will still hurt Meta, but there will also be a larger station for Google. Influencers will need to feel the brunt of choices. I am not talking about people like Georgia Love (see yesterday’s article for that) but people that use their influencer status to promote “It is illegal in the UK to sell nasal sprays or injectables made with “melanotan-2”, an artificial hormone that can accelerate tanning.” Here these influencers need to learn the lesson of not doing their homework. I say that all their video’s are at that point set to zero counter, they lose all their revenue and their channel is removed. Now this is a harder setting. We see “It is illegal in the UK”, so if this influencer is American? We get it and I do not know whether this is illegal in the US, Canada, or the EU. But influencers are so driven to numbers, they do not check where they are watched. There should be an impact, but fairness remains part of this. Yet, when we see “BBC News has spoken to 20 people who have experienced complications, including lesions, fungal infections and abscesses.” Is it truly about fairness? Lives were put in danger and the influencers do not have a really good excuse. I reckon that influencers need to abstain of any product that could impact the health of another, but how to recognise that? There is a dangerous stage, so to stop it in it track now before there is a full 5G network seems essential. Personally I believe that there is no social media source that gives proper investment opportunities. An actual opportunity is for a chosen few, not social media. Social media is for blanket media solutions, get in as many as you can, as quickly as you can. As such I feel a little less for the person with “a consumer who lost more than A$650,000 (£360,000; $480,000) due to one of these scams being falsely advertised as an investment opportunity on Facebook.” Someone who does that does that is too stupid for words. Vetting goes both ways and any investor vets the sources they have and Facebook (Meta) is not a source, neither is Twitter and neither is YouTube. All three could open the door to a direct location that is optionally a good investment, but the chances of that are slim, very slim. Consider the people falling for the Facebook apartment? Someone has a rare option for an apartment in location X where finding a place is hard. Now consider that this person has friends, would you not offer it to your friends first? Would you prefer that a personal friend has a nice new place instead of a person you do not know? That is the stage and it applies to investments a much as it would apply to housing. When dealing with strangers it is in that same setting, direct and to the point. Why? Because I want to make money too, you have got to give a little to get some. So when I offer the options to Randy Lennox and Gary Slaight it is not a shakedown, but it is because they can see the solution that could drive them forward and they can see the benefit of a $50M investment that could bring them in excess of $600,000,000. It is a simple execution of math. This solution could just as easily apply to Amazon, Google a little less so. These people will not now, not ever get such offers, such real offers from Facebook, Meta, Twitter or YouTube. That is how life is and anyone trying to sell you the goods there is fooling you. 

But that is the stage Meta faces, a stage that is drowning in deceptive conduct and there is seemingly no proper vetting in place. There are laws and when the Australian ACCC makes its case Meta could face massive fines and once the first one is there all the others will come calling. The influencers are a different issue, connected to some extent, but there we see that influencers need to be stopped and removing their channel and setting their count to zero will do the trick. When they lose that much money once of twice over these people vanish, a simple equation. It does not sound fair, I get that. But these influencers decided to endanger people and there lies the rub, whether that danger exists in nations where these materials are legal, that becomes a different setting, and I will be happy to admit that I see no easy workable solution here, it starts with Meta. That much is a given at present.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Science

The call of a budgie

Yes, that is almost the foundation of a new cartoon, the story of Sylvester the cat and his sunny side show, Tweety. A show that was funny when we were younger than 13, but now? That is the stage we face (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59182278) with ‘Twitter poll calls on Elon Musk to sell 10% stake in Tesla’. What is this? It is like the BBC has lost its senses. Just like the Dutch government who claimed that they gave in to Twitter pressure when they made a deal with Sywert van Lieden, and no one is asking questions that matters. 

In the first Twitter is no valid source of information, none of the vote can be verified. It could will be three politicians each wielding a troll army of 235,000, we cannot tell. Don’t get me wrong, I love Twitter, it updates me from sources that give me information. Newspapers that have a good reputation, movie productions that give me time lines and optionally a trailer or two, new games. And sometimes a link to something that matters, but polls? A shouting app that allows the rude and the loud to set policy? Never! Its like giving the power of policy on meat to the vegetable store down the road. Or perhaps it lets the NBA make NHL rulings. The proverbial ‘fuck that!’ comes to mind. 

So in this case it is about a poll that allegedly (because a Twitter account can always be hacked) Elon Musk put in the field and the BBC turn it into a lie. They give you “Voters in a Twitter poll have urged Elon Musk to sell 10% of his stake in Tesla in order to pay tax.” That is not what happened. Elon Musk (allegedly) put a question to an audience where he stated “Much is made lately of unrealized gains being a means of tax avoidance, so I propose selling 10% of my Tesla stock. Do you support this?” The response was that 57.9% said yes. We see no numbers, but it could be that 579 out of 1000 said yes. And it is a mere question he aired. And the setting is more. Tax avoidance, or black letter law is legally allowed, it merely means that he would pay what he is due, not what we THINK he is due and the larger stage is that it is again about tax laws, a setting both democrats and republicans have never ever adjusted, not in 2 decades. 

Then we see a part that matters, the BBC gives us “In an earlier tweet on Saturday, Mr Musk said he took no salary or bonuses from any of his companies – meaning he has no earnings on which to pay income tax. But he has made billions of dollars through a compensation package, which gives him power to exercise large amounts of stock options when the company meets performance targets and its shares hit certain prices.” He is legally allowed to do this and certain stupid players need to stop baiting the hook, the law is there, he can do this and he does. It is not good, it is not bad, it is allowed. To be honest, it a certain Randy Lennox takes the steps I could (hopefully) end up with 10% of $400M-$600M. Do you think I will not take these steps? You have got to be joking. The tax laws allow me to do this and I will, it is the law. 

And I am not alone, more and more take this step, because the law allows me to do this. The tax overhaul,. The one step that stops this is avoided by politicians, why is that? Why are these (stupid) people relying on Twitter to try to pressure people? We know it is not a valid source, it can be an informative source, but cannot be verified (so you need to take care on what to believe) and the list goes on (and on and on and on). So there we have a setting and the BBC justly adds to this with “Mr Musk has an option, which expires in August next year, to buy 22.86 million Tesla shares at $6.24 each – a fraction of Tesla’s closing share price on Friday of $1,222.

Under plans proposed by the Democratic Party in the Senate, billionaires could be taxed on “unrealised gains” when the price of their shares goes up – even if they do not sell any of their stock.” This would add another $23,000,000,000 non taxable funds (at the moment). The law allows him to do this, I saw some of my bosses (in the past) do this with much smaller numbers and it has been legal for at least 30 years. If it was such a taboo why didn’t they stop it them. In that time the US had Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and now President Biden, and so far none have done anything. Well the proposition is from the current president, but I reckon that the votes will fail. And even if it holds up, I feel 99.335% certain that there will be a hiatus and there will be ways around it. Thousands of tax lawyers ill be ready to take that proposition apart and drive wedges through its X, Y and Z axis. 

And as some players claim, the value does not always go up. Elon Musk is one man but hundreds of others do the same, if one gets taxed up to these hundreds can use that setting to make it all tax deductible a side the people are eager to avoid staring at, because they see this one Elongatedly uberly rich Musk and they forget that the one winner comes with 999 losers. Do you really wanna give a tax cut to the 999 that follow?

And credit to the BBC to add the comment by Berkeley economist Gabriel Zucman who gives us “Looking forward to the day when the richest person in the world paying some tax does not depend on a Twitter poll” the one sane view in the article. Especially as one of the other Musk polls or statements got ‘altered’ to attain the flaming audience. I too would have questions for Elon Musk, but it would be on his new mobile and other settings that accompany this. I wonder if there is a side that is the danger of a much larger dangerous issue in the works. I am not claiming it is, I am merely wondering on the chances of this, and not from him or his endeavour, but on the dangers of third parties doing something stupid (as they tend to do when their pupils turn to dollar signs). For now I merely wonder, perhaps I will see an opposing view when the clear facts are presented to the world. 

I know, it is merely the view of little (and seemingly old) me, and that does not constitute evidence, but it calls for all kinds of questions, does it not? The call of a budgie is nice when you are drinking tea (or coffee) yet the stage of Twitter remains that we can switch it off when we do something that is important to us, did you consider that? And I get that the BBC saw this as an opening, but I reckon they could have written it differently, but that is my personal view on the matter. Have a fun day!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics