Tag Archives: the Conversation

November 12, 2025 · 14:05

Lost thoughts

The is where I am, lost in thoughts. Drawn between my personal conviction that the AI bubble is real and the set fake thoughts on LinkedIn and Youtube making ‘their’ case on the AI bubble. One is set on thoughts of doubts considering the technology we are currently at, the other thoughts are all fake perceptions by influencers trying to gain a following. So how can any one get any thought straight? Yet in all these there are several people in doubt on their own set (justified) fringes. One of them is ABC who gives us ‘US risks AI debt bubble as China faces its ‘arithmetic problem’, leading analysts warn’ (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-11/marc-sumerlin-federal-reserve-michael-pettis-china/105992570) So in the first setting, what is the US doing with the AI debt? Didn’t they learn their lesson in 2008? In the first setting we get “Mr Sumerlin says he is increasingly worried about a slowing economy and a debt bubble in the artificial intelligence sector.” That is fair (to a certain degree) a US Federal Reserve chair contender has the economic settings, but as I look back to 2008, that game put hundreds of thousands on the brink of desperation and now it isn’t a boom of CDO’s and stocks. Now it is a dozen firms who will demand an umbrella from that same Federal Reserve to stay in business. And Mr. Sumerlin gives us “He is increasingly concerned about a slowdown in the US economy, which is why he thinks the Fed needs to cut interest rates again in December and perhaps a couple more times next year.” I cannot comment on that, but it sounds fair (I lack economic degrees) and outside of this AI bubble setting we are given “US President Donald Trump has recently posted on his social media account about giving all Americans not on high incomes, a $US2,000 tariff “dividend” — an idea which Mr Sumerlin, a one-time economic adviser to former US president George W Bush, said could stoke inflation.” I get it, but it sounds unfair, the idea that an AI bubble is forming is real, the setting that people get a dividend that could stoke inflation might be real (they didn’t get the money yet) but they are unrelated inflation settings and they could give a much larger rise to the dangers of the AI bubble but that doesn’t make it so. The bubble is already real because technology is warped and the class cases we will see coming in 2026 is base on ‘allegedly fraudulent’ sales towards the AI setting and if you wonder what happens, is that these firms buying into that AI solution will cry havoc (no return on AI investment) when that happens and it will happen, of that I have very little doubt. 

So then we get to the second setting and that is the clam that ‘China has an arithmetic problem’, I am at a loss as to what they mean and the ABC explanation is “But if you have a GDP growth target, and you can’t get consumption to grow more quickly, you can’t allow investment to grow more slowly because together they add up to growth. They’re over-invested almost across the board, so policy consists of trying to find out which sectors are least likely to be harmed by additional over-investment.”

Professor Pettis said that, to curry favour with the central government, local governments had skewed over-investment into areas such as solar panels, batteries, electric vehicles and other industries deemed a priority by Beijing.” This kinda makes sense to me, but as I see it, that is an economic setting, not an AI setting. What I think is happening that both USA and China have their own bubble settings and these bubbles will collide in the most unfortunate ways possible. 

But there is also a hindsight. As I see it Huawei is chasing their own AI dream in a novel way that relies on a mere fraction of what the west needs and as I see it, they will be coming up short soon, a setting that Huawei is not facing at present and as I see it, they will be rolling out their centers in multiple ways when the western settings will be running out of juice (as the expression goes). 

Is this going to happen? I think so, but it depends on a number of settings that have not played out yet, so the fear is partially too soon and based on too little information. But on the side I have been powering my brain to another setting. As time goes I have ben thinking through the third Dr. Strange movie and here I had the novel idea which could give us a nice setting where the strain is between too rigid and too flexible and it is a (sort of) stage between Dr. Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and Baron Mordo (Chiwetel Ejiofor) the idea was to set the given stage of being too rigid (Mordo) against overly flexible (Strange) and in-between are the settings of Mordo’s African village and as Mordo is protecting them we see the optional settings that Kraven (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) get involved and that gets Dr. Strange in the mix. The nice setting is that neither is evil, they tend to fight evil and it is the label that gets seen. Anyway that was a setting I went through this morning. 

You might wonder why I mentioned this. You see, Bubbles are just as much labels as anything and it becomes a bubble when asset prices surge rapidly, far exceeding their intrinsic value, often fueled by speculation and investor orgasms. This is followed by a sharp and sudden market crash, or “burst,” when prices collapse, leading to significant rather weighty losses for investors. And they will then cry like little girls over the losses in their wallets. But that too is a label. Just like an IT bubble, the players tend to be rigid and whole focussed on their profits and they tend to go with the ‘roll with it’ philosophy and that is where the AI is at present, they don’t care that the technology isn’t ready yet and they do not care about DML and LLM and they want to program around the AI negativity, but that negativity could be averted in larger streams when proper DML information if given to the customers and they dug their own graves here as the customer demands AI, they might not know what it is (but they want it) and they learned in Comic Books what AI was, and they embrace that. Not the reality given by Alan Turing, but what Marvel fed them through Brainiac. And there is a overlap of what is perceived and what is real and that is what will fuel the AI bubble towards implosion (a massive one) and I personally reckon that 2026 will fuel it through the class actions and the beginning is already here. As the Conversation hands us “Anthropic, an AI startup founded in 2021, has reached a groundbreaking US$1.5 billion settlement (AU$2.28 billion) in a class-action copyright lawsuit. The case was initiated in 2024 by novelist Andrea Bartz and non-fiction writers Charles Graeber and Kirk Wallace Johnson.” Which we get from ‘An AI startup has agreed to a $2.2 billion copyright settlement. But will Australian writers benefit?’ (At https://theconversation.com/an-ai-startup-has-agreed-to-a-2-2-billion-copyright-settlement-but-will-australian-writers-benefit-264771) less then 6 weeks ago. And the entire AI setting has a few more class actions coming their way. So before you judge me on being crazy (which might be fair too) the news is already out there, the question is what lobbyists are quieting down the noise because that is noise according to their elected voters. You might wonder how one affect the other. Well, that is a fair question, but it hold water, as these so called AI (I call them Near Intelligent Parses, or NIP) require training materials and when the materials are thrown out of the stage, there is no learning and no half baked AI will holds its own water and that is what is coming. 

A simple setting that could be seen by anyone who saw the technology to the degree it had to. Have a great day this mid week day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, movies, Politics, Science

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

October 4, 2025 · 16:23

The Magoo’s of media

That is the setting and as I saw an article pass by, I also saw the setting on how it affects my idea. You see, the conversation starts with ‘What Saudi Arabia’s role in the Electronic Arts buyout tells us about image, power and ‘game-washing’’ (at https://theconversation.com/what-saudi-arabias-role-in-the-electronic-arts-buyout-tells-us-about-image-power-and-game-washing-266359), you see, as I see it the ‘critics’ are always looking at tomorrows and at yesterdays news and as such they give us “The global video game industry is worth more than the film and music industries combined. But why would these buyers specifically want to buy EA, an entity that has won The Worst Company in America award twice?” And as I see it, they deserved that ‘title’ but there is an offset to all that. In my setting I saw that the world had enjoyed the Atari 800, Commodore 64, Atari ST and Commodore Amiga and in that timeframe 1985-1999 over 10,000 games were produced and when you take to top 10% you end up with 1000 games. I wrote about that a few years ago and now consider how many of that top 10% is Electronic Arts? A whole heap and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia owns it all now. There is a reason that they paid $55,000,000,000 and they get the winning numbers. Now consider how many of them can be transferred with upgraded graphics and sounds to a new streaming system like Tencent (Amazon seemingly didn’t want to play) and they are about to set that system in over 50 million houses (in past one) and that is one of the three pillars dealt with. The others have no IP protection and can be altered to a minimum setting to be valid IP. That is what the conversation is seemingly not considering. And they are painting it with “Video game publisher Electronic Arts (EA), one of the biggest video game companies in the world behind games such as The Sims and Battlefield, has been sold to a consortium of buyers for US$55 billion (about A$83 billion). It is potentially the largest-ever buyout funded by private equity firms. Not AI, nor mining or banking, but video games.” And that is the ballpark, it isn’t about AI where everyone is acing to proclaim that they have the winning combination (I reckon only to disappoint their ‘customers’) but the three pronged  solution that is out to give the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia the winning setting is about to align the Islamic world in a new world never seen before and everyone is looking around for what should have been on their visors. And I warned them even before I wrote ‘The second confirmation’ which I did on November 5th 2023 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/11/05/the-second-confirmation/) I said so at least a dozen times that Google and Amazon were that much asleep leaving billions on the floor (no one cares about Microsoft) and now the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is getting that setting done. Alas, I might not get anything (I tried to sell the idea to the Kingdom Holdings), but my small giggle is to show Amazon and Google how they deserted billions in revenue, so any ‘sales person’ who tells me that I am seeing it wrong, I get to show them, how they openly left billions on the floor and someone will pick it up at some point and it seems that this moment is now. 

So whilst we are given “The consortium will purchase all of the publicly traded company’s shares, making it private. But while the consortium and EA’s shareholders will likely be celebrating – each share was valued at US$210, representing a 25% premium – it’s not all good news.

PIF acquiring EA raises concerns about possible “game-washing”, and less than ideal future business practices.” By The Conversation we see a different part. It isn’t game-washing. It is a proper developed gaming option that the world left behind because it isn’t AI. So when AI gets the umpteenth class action on how AI wasn’t and as those engineers were seemingly held to account, Saudi Arabia has another setting of making up to 15-20 billion a years and that is what others left on the floor (it is only about 6 billion in phase one). So whilst those people come with complain and cry about the setting of micro transactions. The setting of “Micro transactions are small amounts of money paid to access, or potentially access, in-game items or currency. Over time, they can add up to a lot of money, and have even been linked to the creation of problem gambling behaviors. Unsurprisingly, they are not popular among players.” They could have just ben cast aside and added as freeware. It is all revenue of the kingdom and greed is frowned upon in Islamic nations. As such they can be cast aside and just for reference. There were hundreds of thousands of fans looking forward to a revamped Dungeon Keeper and cast aside when micro transactions were introduced. Now this setting (without micro transactions) could be released gaining that solutions hundred of thousands of fans. And that is merely one example of many. 

So whilst the Conversation and others are on the ‘laundry’ list, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is simply setting a new platform for over 800,000,000 customers and set a new setting towards the Islamic world, optionally slicing the options for Facebook and others (like Google) to gain advertisement revenue, because when you get access to 20% of the planetary population, you can hand them what they want to do, not what your advertisers want you to do. You see, in Saudi Arabia “The CITC in conjunction with the General Authority for Media Regulation (GAMR), requires advertisers to submit campaigns and media to this regulatory body for approval before broadcasting, digital or offline display. In order to avoid rejected campaigns, marketers must be familiar with the key Islamic guidelines governing advertising content, including religious restrictions on alcohol, pork, gender portrayal, modesty, and symbols.” And that gets American and European advertisers into problems and that is how they are shut out. There is another body managing this, but I forgot the details. What happens is that there is a place where the setting is islamic and I had the additional setting of what I call ‘Tomes of information’ and through that Saudi Arabia gets visibility through and from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt and Indonesia. Setting the advertisement losses close to a billion viewers. That is what Saudi Arabia now gained. 

As as I see it, it is not about image, power or ‘game-washing’. It is a business decision that gets to unite the islamic world in more ways then one and alas, I seemingly am missing out, but I get to hold it over the heads of Amazon and Google for nearly all time. What a lovely feeling. 

Have a great day this Saturday (Vancouver is joining us in 30 minutes) and consider what running in a rat-race is not giving you. I merely looked in a different direction and saw billions. What can you see when you put your mind to it (and optionally clean your glasses)?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science

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

April 10, 2025 · 12:08

New short term thinking

The news hit me somewhere yesterday. I got it by means of a LinkedIn mention, and it gave me reason to pause. Here is one version of that news (at https://techwireasia.com/2025/04/microsoft-pauses-key-builds-in-indonesia-us-and-uk-amid-infrastructure-review/) with the mention ‘Microsoft pauses data centre investment in Indonesia, US, and UK’, and here we see the byline “Microsoft pauses or delays data centre projects in the UK, US, and Indonesia.”, it is my view that they cannot afford this setting. You might have heard the American expression, “Go big or go home” and I think that Microsoft is about to go home. You see, I have forever had the clear opinion that there is no AI. I call it NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing), the setting that if too many start accepting the setting that I was always right (which comes from the clear setting that there is one AI station and it was given to us by Alan Turing) the people will realise that there is no AI and it comes down to programming and a programmer. That setting puts Microsoft in hot water for a lot of heavy water (to be poured over their heads). And lets be clear, a side you can confirm with mere logical thinking. A data Centre is a long term setting. No matter what you put in the White House (by some called the village idiot) whatever this administration is, it is short term and a data centre is long term and that so called hype around their AI should never waver. You see, this short term action (read: knee jerk reaction) implies short term planning and that is where they all get into hot waters. Why did you think that I made mention that Google needs to put a data centre in Iceland and consolidate their thinking into geo thermal reactors? (Reactors might not be the right word). A setting where ceramic tiles (or cylinders) surrounding new constructions that is not unlike a nuclear reactor, but the reactor is all around them, not Uranium rods, the Lava (or Magma) is the powerful and as it is merely bleeding the radiation, the fuel never dissipates and never ending energy is theirs. For all these parties looking of creating data centers (as far as I can see around 50 in total globally) they will all require energy and as one data centre takes energy close to a amount a small city does, we will get energy issues a lot sooner than we think.

Did Microsoft think this through? Pretty sure they did and their conclusion is that they cannot spend billion on data centers. So at the same time as we are given “Rivals Oracle and OpenAI ramp up investments”, I come to the conclusion that Microsoft can no longer afford the bills their ego’s committed themselves to. Feel free to disagree, but they set out this AI ‘vibe’ and own 49% of OpenAI, so why close down their Data Centers whilst they ‘own’ one of the ramp up partners? They are figuring out that they are too deeply committed. And as the world realizes that NIP is not the same as actual AI, they fear what is coming next.

So you decide what to make of the stage of “Microsoft has acknowledged changing its strategy but declined to provide details about specific projects. “We plan our data centre capacity needs years in advance to ensure we have sufficient infrastructure in the right places,” a Microsoft spokesperson said. “As AI demand continues to grow, and our data centre presence continues to expand, the changes we have made demonstrates the flexibility of our strategy.”” As I see it, it is an answer, but not the one that touches on this. I come with questions as ‘What growth?’ All this sets the need for some lowered activity, not pausing, unless you know what comes next and there is a larger setting with Oracle, Tencent and Huawei, I know there is a Swedish centre as well but I forgot the name. All these are ramping up, but Microsoft is pausing? That makes no sense unless there is another reason and my thought of “They can no longer afford it” takes another gander and when we consider that they paused “North Dakota, Illinois, Wisconsin, the UK midlands and Jakarta, Indonesia.” That implies something is going on and when we combine this with “Microsoft cuts data centre plans and hikes prices in push to make users carry AI costs” (source: The Conversation, March 3rd 2025) these elements together implies (imply, not proven) tells me that there is a funding setting for Microsoft. Combine that with the lovely voiced fact of “OpenAI brought in US$3.7 billion in revenue – but spent almost US$9 billion, for a net loss of around US$5 billion.” (Source: the Conversation) we see another failed setting and that failure gets to be bigger. As Amazon, Google, Oracle, Tencent and Huawei steam ahead getting larger data centers and ready long before Microsoft is there means less revenue for Microsoft. I did say that they could go big or go home? I reckon that Microsoft already lost 6 times on front settings and they lost to Amazon, Apple (twice), Sony, Adobe, Google, and IBM. I should add Huawei to that list but they already bungled that setting before Huawei became an actual competitor. A simple deduction from little stupid old me. 

So whatever you do, you might look into the trust you gave Microsoft and see that you are not left with an empty shell. Oh, and to prove that I am not anti-Microsoft you need to know that they did corner the spreadsheet market (Excel) and the flight Simulator market. Microsoft did some things good, but when it comes to the spin setting of vibes they need to reassess their situation.

Have a great day, it’s midweek now. I am happily in the next day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

February 5, 2025 · 13:25

News to me

That happens. I do not know everything and it is not my business to know everything. I learned that early in life, before I know thought I knew everything, I learned as I took the oath of a radio operator, that there is a price for knowing too I much and as such I tried to ‘calm’ the need to know too much. When it is in my business to know, I try to know the materials pretty thoroughly. I tech support there was one program I had to know, but I had to know it on dozens of systems and  for the most I knew the goods. This is not some spreadsheet or a presentation program and you know the in’s and outs of the program (not dissing these software solutions) but in one program know the issues on IBM MVS, DEC digital VMS, AS/400, Sun systems, Unit systems, Windows Systems and a whole lot more, and every mainframe had its own coordinators handbook. For the most it was OK. The dealers could help its own customers but when working deeper they came with questions on installation, data cleaning, syntaxes of the system and of course the limitations that existed per system. In an age where there was no system (it was promised, but was always a month away) I kept my head above water. So what does this have to do with the current issue?

It was given to me in the Conversation (at https://theconversation.com/trumps-trade-war-is-forcing-canada-to-revive-a-decades-old-plan-to-reduce-u-s-dependence-248433) where we get ‘Trump’s trade war is forcing Canada to revive a decades-old plan to reduce U.S. dependence’ it is here that we are given “After threatening Canada and Mexico with illegal tariffs, and Canada with annexation, United States President Donald Trump has agreed to hold off on imposing tariffs on Canada for at least 30 days. This decision came after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke with Trump and committed to strengthening border security” with the added “Early responses seem to have coalesced around two policies: for Canada to trade less with the U.S. and more with other countries and to strengthen the internal Canadian economy.” This implies that the free trade agreements were signed up with that in mind and to ‘diverge’ Canada to go that way. It seems weird that the ‘councilors’ of this US administration did not hammer on this, or seemingly did not hammer this. You see, as I see it President trump shot himself in the foot here. And then watered all over himself. Two distinct settings that could have been avoided. Now America faces tariffs themselves and come to boot Allies of Canada are signing up deals on all markets which will cost America dearly. It also means that the Commonwealth will become stronger as one together. I don’t know (at present) where India stands, but in retail and pharmaceutical solutions there is every chance that Canada will seek solutions in that field. So as we see “But it will impose significant costs on Canadians and require a fundamental readjustment in how we think about our economy and society.” This might be fair, but that all depends on what India could help save Canada costs, if that is achieved (though pharmaceuticals mainly) the net savings for Canada are a lot greater then expected. There will be cost in the beginning yet in the end it might work out cheaper (not easier) for Canada.

Then we are given “In 1972, then-Secretary of State for External Affairs Mitchell Sharp wrote a paper called “Canada-US Relations: Options for the Future.” At the time, international politics were in a moment of transition, and the U.S. was recalibrating its understanding of its national interest.” It is here we are given (at https://gac.canadiana.ca/view/ooe.b1557737E_001/329) a lot more then we bargained for. It is a 332 page paper, as such the 46MB file is not here, but in its original location. As such I would surmise that American administrations forgot about ‘the U.S. was recalibrating its understanding of its national interest’ it seemingly forgot about this. I prefer to think that the setting of pending bankruptcy is making them knee jerk themselves into the next month and the next and the next. Yet there is a rather nasty hindsight to this (not for me). There is a rather urgent need to reassess criminal behavior. So the settings we see in London and other cities (like Los Angeles) imply that a more Venezuelan setting will come to America (thanks to Steve Inman) his comments are setting a new side to the debate. There is no doubt that these ‘free $1000 thefts’ will result in a need to shoot to kill escalation and for the most no one has a problem with that. This escalation is right on the horizon now. The $1000 misdemeanor setting will  (according to some) take care of the freeloaders and especially shopkeepers are fine with that. So as America does away with its freeloaders we still have an issue in Canada and for the most part I hesitate to consider what made America consider its tariff setting, especially as Canada was considering the paper in 1972, it might have been long, but not too long and in light of current trends this setting was on the horizon as were other options and now that America is feeling its first brunt with BRICS, there was a cautious tale on the horizon. And now that the US administration is setting up a ‘Sovereign Wealth Fund’ with the underlying ““We have tremendous potential,” Trump said while signing the order from the Oval Office on Monday. “I think in a short period of time, we’d have one of the biggest funds.”” (Source: The Guardian) I personally disagree. They HAD tremendous potential and now that they started the tariff wars (it doesn’t matter if it is on hold for 30 days). Canada is now looking at setting additional channels with the Commonwealth, whilst diminishing trade and we now see that there is a 1972 paper who did the hard stuff. The question is how much of that is still valid. I actually don’t know that, but I left the link for your reference. Then there is the options that America left on the floor and now China has an inner track to set a lot more towards the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. I mentioned it more then once in the last two years. As America stifled the sale of their F35, China has been active on at least two weapons trade shows to give rise to the Chengdu J-20 from the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group. Did you think that China left a call for a few dozen billion unanswered? At $110,000,000 that implies at least 3 squadrons and guess what, they will not be compatible with whatever Northrop Grumman or Raytheon has to offer. As such there could be a bigger shift in that setting. And as soon as China ‘proves’ that the Chengdu J-20 is at least equal or even superior to the F35, America loses that game too. You see, China only have to prove it is at least equal, a much lower threshold. Add that to the Canadian setting and as Canada can prove goods to the UAE and Saudi Arabia (optionally Egypt and Bangladesh) that are a few more markets where Canada will get slices of pizza that were meant for America. All that for a tariff? So how much more does America have to lose to show its ‘Sovereign Wealth Fund’ to be close to irrelevant. Yes, others will profit too. Yet Canada never wanted this setting in the first place and that is where short term considerations make some lose ‘their’ war. And just for consideration. Fentanyl is not new. As given by some “Fentanyl was synthesized in 1960 as an intravenous anesthetic and went on the market in the U.S. in 1968. Transdermal fentanyl was developed in the 1980s and was subsequently used for pain management in cancer patients” it was invented by the Belgiums and it has been on the market over half a century. So it is not new, the (speculated) non-actions by America made it an easy drug to score big on. In addition, it is a pharmaceutical  with a boxed warning. So why is it not a controlled substance set to a narcotic? Lets consider that narcotics were ‘outlawed’ in 1914 and went to the American market in 1968. So why was it even allowed? And even as we see in the Conversation where we are given “For the Third Option to be viable today, Canadians must embrace an independent Canadian identity based on respect for democracy, pluralism, the rule of law and human rights. It likely requires consensus that U.S. authoritarianism is wholly unacceptable to Canada.” And this third option point is now reached and so far (as is visible) nearly all the Commonwealth nations. As I see the Australian parties weaseling (my personal assessment) as “Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell is seeking talks with America” (source: News) where we see no clear message to Canada in support as a Commonwealth nation (like weasels as I personally see it). At this setting Scotland shows itself as a much more honorable Commonwealth nation, but the larger issue will be India, as that is where the massive parts of retail goes. I get that India is playing a sensitive game but something must give at some point, Canada needs us now. From a personal note, Canada was there for the Netherlands in WW2. As Dutch born I will stand with Canada on this.

Yet the larger setting is missed. In the end Canada is not the larger play. It will be China and what it can grab from America on the long term from them involving Saudi Arabia, the UAE and optionally Egypt as well.

So have a loverly day and if you are in America try drinking Tim Hortons for a change. It might wake you up faster, stronger and better.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

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

March 29, 2023 · 00:44

The snooze that does not wake

It started some time ago, but the recollection that The Conversation gave me was enough. I saw the message around 05:00, as such I needed some time to recollect the information. But we get to that in a moment. The Conversation (at https://theconversation.com/as-longterm-partnership-with-us-fades-saudi-arabia-seeks-to-diversify-its-diplomacy-and-recent-deals-with-china-iran-and-russia-fit-this-strategy-202211) gives us ‘Saudi Arabia seeks to diversify its diplomacy – and recent deals with China, Iran and Russia fit this strategy’ It sounds simple enough, but it is not. You see, the story gives more than one quote that is important. I prefer to focus on “Riyadh and other Gulf capitals as leaders began to question U.S. credibility as a reliable regional partner” that was the gemstone not the only one, but this one matters. You see, you cannot deny allies the needs they have and then make demands from them as an ally. Like cheap oil. Saudi Arabia wanted to grow its national defence systems and America said, well,  one part said yes and then congress said no, America said no. So now we take a small trip. A trip to ‘The Persian Gulf match’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/06/06/the-persian-gulf-match/) which I wrote on the 6th of June 2019, almost 4 years ago. There I wrote “The actions of the American US Congress have shown that what they regard as being an ally is not what an ally is; it is not even what a wannabe ally would consider to be. As such apart from your advancement in technology and infrastructure a much larger foundation for your national defence is seemingly essential in the immediate future. The shown delays that the European Union have shown to be regarding Iran, Turkey and terrorist organisations like Hezbollah give rise to the essential need of China to become part of that solution.” It was part of a concept letter addressed to the Saudi Royal family. I wrote this almost 4 years ago and now we see this coming to fruition. Saudi Arabia is on the verge of buying a renewal of military goods from China, not the EU and not the US, setting their coffers back close to 20 billion. And now the stakes are increasing.

This is seen when Reuters informs us that Saudi Arabia is agreeing to build a new petrochemical refinery in China. The stage is that the two refineries will be able to process over 500,000 barrels a day. The fine print is not known, but I am willing to make a serious bet that China will soon get its hands on 500,000 barrels a day extra and I feel certain that this will come off the allotted amount for the EU and the US. I warned several times of this danger between 2019 and 2023, look it up, it is done in clear print (at www.lawlordtobe.com). I did not see the refineries in that mix, but for some strange reason Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud will not tell me what goes on in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, what a surprise. But the larger stage is now taking shape. First the defence industry, then other enhancements and now the reduction of oil towards the west. That was the danger stage we all faced since 2019, and US congress and other Americans wanted to play egomaniac, they were the strength of the world. Guess what, you need money to pull that off and America only has debts, which now is about $30,000,000,000,000 and there is no way back. That stopped a year ago when America forfeited billions in revenue and that list is merely increasing. Now that China has a firm grip on opportunities all over the Middle East their goal is merely increasing. And I tried to warn people of this, I tried to warn the UK to step in or lose it all and as the Typhoon didn’t make the Saudi choice, I reckon they are missing out too.

The setting is “U.S. credibility as a reliable regional partner” that is what President Biden needs to resolve and he needs to resolve it now, any opposition from Congress and the problem merely grows and accelerates. That was what I saw in 2019, that is what is happening now. A stage clearly foreseen and ignored by the US windbags. To be honest I had hoped to serve Saudi Arabia in some capacity and optionally score 3.75% commission, which does not seem much, but over a billion it is still $37 million and if the work is for more than a billion, that bonus merely increases and assures me of a nice retirement parachute. 

So how long until that refinery is build? How long until we get hit by the small print that well over 500,000 barrels of oil a day will go to China? I honestly do not know, but I reckon that this news gets heralded when the refinery is around 95% complete. The timeline? I cannot tell, can you?

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

October 29, 2022 · 20:37

Put the hammer down

It sounds overly dramatic, but I believe that enough is enough. The idea that a bully gets awarded is just too disgusting to me. I am of course speaking about the attack on Paul Pelosi in San Francisco. The idea that some nut job gets a glove treatment after a man, whose ‘crime’ is to be married to the speaker of the house is just too unsettling. I have never been much of an American democrat, that side ended after JFK. The democrats are pushing too much for a nanny state and I have an issue with that, but I accept that the Democrats were elected, they call the shots as is the consequence of an election. So as we learn “Bill Scott, chief of the San Francisco police department, said the suspect in the attack on Paul Pelosi will face charges of attempted homicide and assault with a deadly weapon, among others.”, as well as “The chief identified the suspect as 42-year-old David Depape. In addition to attempted homicide, he’ll also face charges of “elder abuse, burglary, and several other additional felonies”, Scott said.” All this and more is given to us by the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2022/oct/28/democrats-obama-midterms-republicans-us-politics-live-updates) some other sources described David Depape as another conspiracy theorist, not unlike the loads of people we see more and more in the Dutch political landscape. They are no longer an annoyance, they are now a danger and I personally believe that the Nanny state empowered them, the masses gave people like this a voice on digital media whilst those behind the screens are cashing in on the digital advertisement revenue. And people like Alex Jones are making this worse. A mere 5 days ago he files for a new trial. We get to hear (also from the Guardian) “Jones filed the requests Friday, saying Judge Barbara Bellis’s pretrial rulings resulted in an unfair trial and “a substantial miscarriage of justice”.” It is the ‘miscarriage of justice’ part that gets to me, we see “the shooting was a hoax staged by “crisis actors” to impose more gun control”, we see how this man exploits the damage to the families of 24 murdered children and he has the guts to rely on ‘miscarriage of justice’? This is too rich. I reckon that the Conversation had it right with ‘Hypocrisy is beneath them – political figures in the Trump era don’t bother concealing their misdeeds’ and the nanny state is merely growing their voice. It is there that we see Journalist Carlos Lozada give us “Their bad behaviour is now acceptable, so it needs no disguise” and that is is the setting behind this. This is what drives it and I gave a solution a long time ago, whilst the money hungry people went after tech firms, they forgot that the people no matter how entitled they are to their opinion, they should be held to account and if that was done people like Alex Jones have no recourse, people like David Depape would have been held to account long before he handed that hammer. And in the US with over 320,000,000 people this becomes more and more pressing. The land of opportunity has become overcrowded and the wannabe’s shout louder and louder at the expense of innocent children and a business man whose only ‘crime’ was to be married to a politician. 

It is time for the politicians to wake up and do something about this and hold the wielders of their voice accountable for their actions and for what they claim. People like Alex Jones saw the first trial as a way to get even more limelight, to get even more people relying on the Nanny state to listen to what he has to say. Yet no one is looking at the laws that allow these lie spouters to continue. This has been a setting for decades and now we see more and more impact and it does not end with the US. The Netherlands which is almost the size of Maryland (4,000 sqm larger) has a very different setting. Maryland with its 6.1 million people is nowhere near crowded as the Netherlands with 17.53 million people. A nation with the population pressures of Manhattan. There is a reason why I mentioned them, you see they are dealing more and more with pro-Russian trolls, conspiracy theorists and spouters of anti-Ukrainian stages and this will have a much more violent outcome. People like David Depape weren’t leading this, they were merely the first to go nuts and consider that this happens in a place like the Netherlands where in my youth an attack on politicians was almost unheard of, now people, via trolls propagate their home addresses. A man creating discord with intent to cause harm outside of Sigrid Kaag’s house. Merely because someone published the address. This will get a lot worse unless these laws are adjusted and until these conspiracy theorists are held accountable. I mean we all have the innocent conspiracy (funny example: Matt Damon is an alien, he’s Martian) but to exploit 24 murdered children takes a new (and lower) level of sick and the law is seemingly falling short here, that feeling comes with Alex Jones demanding a retrial, these families have to go through it all again. I personally hope that the financial damages are upheld and that he get an additional 15 years in federal prison, that might wake up the other theorists enough to reconsider the harm they are creating.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

December 2, 2021 · 04:43

The shoddy essay

I actively dislike certain people, especially as they use their position to merely lash out at others. This is seen (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/01/saudi-arabia-yemen-un-human-rights-investigation-incentives-and-therats) when we see Stephanie Kirchgaessner have another go at Saudi Arabia. I honestly think that is all she does. So here is my take. The article ‘Saudis used ‘incentives and threats’ to shut down UN investigation in Yemen’ Of course my first reaction was ‘What UN investigation in Yemen?’ And the article starts off with “Political officials and diplomatic and activist sources describe stealth campaign”. I go into the article and I am treated to “according to sources with close knowledge of the matter”, “Riyadh is alleged to have warned Indonesia”, and lets not forget ““You could see the whole thing shift, and that was a shock,” said one person familiar with the matter”, so what people were familiar to the matter? What actually happened? It is a fair question, especially when we are given “The resolution was defeated by a simple majority of 21-18, with seven countries abstaining”, it is in this case that I am apparently a much better investigator. So, lets take a look.

First lets look at some headlines ‘UN calls on Yemen’s Houthis to release detained staff’, ‘UN: Houthi rebels impeding aid flow in Yemen’, ‘Yemen: Houthi Terrorism Designation Threatens Aid’, and these are just three headlines from dozens in the last two years. In this, the UN and other parties (like essay writers) have been really active in silencing any actions that included Houthi and Iranian forces in Yemen. The article has two mentions on Houthi, one in a photo and none (read: Zero) mentions of Iran. We see one mention of all in “committed by all sides”. The article is that one sided and that much of a hack job. The situation in Yemen is large, much larger then this essay writer makes it out to be. 

I am not making some claim that Saudi Arabia is innocent, but I can tell you it is definitely not that guilty either. Houthi and Iranian forces have at least part of that blame (well over 50%) and we seem to forget that all this started by Houthi forces, The Saudi coalition was asked to come and no one seems to notice that. So whilst the Guardian hides behind “the Saudis appear to have influenced officials”, I merely wonder if there isn’t a much larger picture. We see mention by John Fisher giving us “It was a very tight vote. We understand that Saudi Arabia and their coalition allies and Yemen were working at a high level for some time to persuade states in capitals through a mixture of threats and incentives, to back their bids to terminate the mandate of this international monitoring mechanism”, here we see the stage, but we ignore the lighting. In addition to that stage, what evidence is there for “through a mixture of threats and incentive”, you see Iran and  Houthi Yemen do not want any monitoring for a few reasons, and they are non-mentioned parties, why is that? Shovelling BS all on one pile is nice at times and we love to see all that BS piled up at Strasbourg, but that will not happen either will it? 

You think that this I the end, but it is time to add flavour to it all,  because in all fairness, Stephanie Kirchgaessner is not in this alone, the stakes against Saudi Arabia are much larger. That is seen when we add the Conversation (at https://theconversation.com/jobs-are-no-excuse-canada-must-stop-arming-saudi-arabia-171792) where we see “Jobs are no excuse — Canada must stop arming Saudi Arabia”, and I would state ‘Yes, handing more revenue to China is the way to go!’ I would love to get a larger billion dollar stake holding a 3.75% bonus setting. Even as we are given “The bulk of Canadian arms exports to the Saudis are light armoured vehicles, known as LAVs”, We see the attack using ‘Human Rights’ all whilst Saudi Arabia is under actual attack, Houthi (apparently Iranian operated drones) are attacking civil targets in South Saudi Arabia, so whilst we are given “Canada has twice been named by the United Nations Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen as one of several world powers helping to perpetuate the conflict by continuing to supply weapons to Saudi Arabia”, and we are not given the clear involvement of Iranian and Houthi settings, it is all a one sided attack and it matters, these people attack one sided for a larger need, an ego driven need and the media is helping them do this. But feel free to state I am wrong, and I am happy to be wrong, especially if $12,000,000,000 going to China might fetch me a nice 450 million dollars (I can dream, can’t I?). when the numbers are this high 3.75% makes a very nice number. And the world is making this happen, so when we see project after project fail in Europe and the US because the moral high ground came at a price, consider the names of people who made that happen. Hunger on the moral high ground is not rare, it usually is linked to all kinds of revenue that they never got. This is not a perfect world, I never claimed it to be, but a commerce world needs to sell all kinds of stuff, also stuff that seems to be wrong, there is no denying that. And when it comes to that side, these two articles leave Houthi and Iranian actions in the dark. You should wonder why that is, because a nation does not spend 12 billion in any one sided event. If it was truly one sided one billion would have been more than enough. Did you consider that?

The US and the EU have at presently dropped 48 billion in revenue, revenue that they desperately needed and now that von der Leyen revealed the ‘300 billion euro answer to China’s Belt and Road’, how will that be paid for? Not from the revenue that Saudi Arabia required to defend its borders. That revenue will support China’s Belt and Road projects, a nice pickle they got themselves in and no one is wondering how this farce can go on, because soon there will be no money left, the overdrawn credit cards from the US, the EU, France, Germany and the UK makes any economic action close to impossible. And soon (in about 3-5 weeks) when the US has another debt ceiling, consider all the things that the US could have done to stop the new stress settings; the EU and the UK as well, now that these funds are going to China, the stage changed, the electricity bill can no longer be paid and there is no fighting ring, there is no event to watch, it is just a dark room in a dark location and that I the setting we all had to avoid. But rejoice, you then know one element that Yemeni people face, they have no electricity either, the Houthi forces made sure of that. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

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

June 25, 2021 · 19:45

Non Comprehension

This is an article that is a little different. To be clear, it consist of an article (from Reuters) and a really weird dream I had, a dream I do not seem to understand at present, but when I think of one, the other one hammers down on me. In the dream I am in a small cubicle, a cubicle with a sliding door, the cubicle is small, barely enough space for 3 people to stand in. I a wearing some kind of hood, not unlike flame proof hood you see Formula one people wear. The hood restricts views to the side, and I kept on hearing ‘Ghost mode deactivating’ and ‘Ghost mode deactivated’, there was a man there, mid or end 30’s, yet I keep on not seeing the face. And the light, there is a small light there, but I seem to be weirdly overreactive to light, almost shunning light. Not sure why. That is all the parts I remember, there is more but every time it is within reach, it slips away. It was decently unsettling. 

The article is quite different, it I found at https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-facebook-rejects-talks-with-australia-publisher-testing-worlds-2021-06-25/ and the headline ‘Facebook rejects talks with Australia publisher, testing world’s toughest online law’ should speak volumes. As I read “Australia’s competition watchdog is looking into a claim that Facebook Inc refused a publisher’s request to negotiate a licensing deal, the regulator told Reuters, setting the stage for the first test of the world’s toughest online content law”, so when we see this some will react. Yet questions keep on forming in my mind. So when I see “Facebook declined without giving a reason, The Conversation said, even though the publisher was among the first in Australia to secure a similar deal with Google in the lead-up to the law in 2020” I wonder what is actually in play. You see, they are putting too much faith in social media, it is the old and ever returning discussion of perception and awareness, yet without engagement it almost means nothing and being on social media the way they do is not engagement, it is almost a fake form of representation. They are all vying for the wrong pile of nothing. It is almost like the Conversation is setting itself up to be someone else’s tool. The conversation has internet, it has a website (at https://theconversation.com), so why does it need social media? The article does give the answer one paragraph later with “The knock-back could present the first test of a controversial mechanism unique to Australia’s effort to claw back advertising dollars from Google and Facebook: if they refuse to negotiate licence fees with publishers, a government-appointed arbitrator may step in”, with ‘claw back advertising dollars’, it is seemingly about the money, it is always about the money. 

Yes, I agree that this is a method that seemingly works, seemingly is the operative word. Yet the mission (of greed) in light of what we see is not to push for borders that everyone pushes, it is about creating engagement, a part many marketeers and market researchers are eager to avoid, those numbers are not that impressive in too many of cases. So whilst we ponder the words of Andrew Hunter, we look at “Hunter did not answer specific questions concerning The Conversation, but said Facebook was planning a separate initiative “to support regional, rural and digital Australian newsrooms and public-interest journalism in the coming months”, without giving details”, yet when we consider that it first launched in Australia in March 2011, and has expanded into editions in the United Kingdom in 2013, United States in 2014, Africa and France in 2015, Canada in 2017, Indonesia in 2017, and Spain in 2018. In September 2019, The Conversation reported a monthly online audience of 10.7 million users onsite, and a combined reach of 40 million people including republications, it is also available in English, French, Spanish, and Indonesian, so the entire ‘regional, rural and digital Australian newsrooms’ becomes debatable. One could optionally argue that Facebook has a circle of stakeholders that is looking out for their own media friends. I agree that my view is personal and optionally debatable as well, yet the issues in play overlap in a weir way, a view with a limited view forward, not to the sides, just like the F1 hood I was wearing in my dream, I could not see the sides other then to turn my head. 

Facebook could be playing a real dangerous game, but it is not one I can see at present. They are slick and hiding behind party lines, giving us ambiguous “journalism in the coming months”, especially when the details are missing, and the media doesn’t rely on day to day, do they? And it is then, at the end of the article where Rod Sims gives the game away with “If Google’s done a deal with them, I can’t see how Facebook should argue that they shouldn’t” with the added “using the term for assigning an arbitrator”, this is about drawing borderlines and the Australian ACCC allowed for this new stage of media war, the sad part is that the ones with money will get their share, they are or will become stakeholders, the small players like the Conversation do not. It seems to be (at least in my mind) a stage that politicians never understood in the first place, or they did and they were fending for themselves, not the people. The pie of revenue is shrinking and the current players want their same share (plus 10%), the fallout will be growing over time, I feel certain of that. I merely wonder what the others will do whilst the larger players ignore engagement (for now), in the old station of a program like AnswerTree, the setting was clear, you can either mail more to keep the revenue, growing cost again and again, and you have the option to mail more efficient, growing engagement is mailing more efficient and in the end better rewarding. Yet in all this, it is not about Facebook, Google or the Conversation. It is about the political players, they are about themselves and it will cost the media a lot more than they are willing to accept soon enough.

It is merely my view, it is speculative but I think it is more on point then even I can admit to.

1 Comment

Filed under Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , ,

March 12, 2021 · 22:05

The broken record

That is how I feel at times, all the instances that people come and parrot like repeat the accusations left, right and center. All those times I feel like I am in a losing war, a shouting match and my voice is gone, but here I go again and this time two events took place, but the BBC set them off and it starts with the interview with Ian Murray giving us the headline ‘Meghan racism row: Society of Editors boss Ian Murray resigns’, at first I was not that interested, to be honest, in the world of journalism, or what some call journalism, the value of a journalist tends to be lower than the value of a crack pusher. Yet this interview gave me a few nice parts. It starts at 00:53 (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56355274), when questions are asked on the headlines, yet Ian Murray deflects it all, changing the conversation (or trying to), in the end he never answered the question, he tried to change the conversation. This is the larger problem with the media, the media is not here to support and to inform you the reader, the listener or the watcher. Here we see the dangers of the Society of Editors. These people have a charter, an unspoken one. They protect the share holders, the stakeholders and the advertisers, after that it becomes as emotional as possible, so that flaming will ensue more and more revenue. The actual journalism is left to a chosen few and that group is exceedingly shrinking. It is the most clear example, but it is not the only one.

The second part is the Jamal Khashoggi joke. This senseless form of humour gives us headlines in nearly all papers, with live interviews with UN essay writers, but not any evidence, or better stated quality evidence that could be regarded in a court of law. CNN gives us ‘White House won’t punish Saudi Crown Prince for Khashoggi murder’, all whilst there is no evidence at all, there is a source (the one that promised that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq), but they water it down to highly probable to probable that it happened. The factual stage is that something most likely happened to Jamal Khashoggi, but there is no evidence, mere speculation. And in part it (optionally) helps me. I will happily take the $6,800,000,000 revenue and courier the papers between Riyadh and Beijing for a nice fee (the 3.75% commission I mentioned in previous articles). I already have the dream house I deeply desire lined up. You see there needs to be an actual cost to doing business and the media is due its invoice too.

The Guardian in July 2019 reported (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/jul/09/most-uk-news-coverage-of-muslims-is-negative-major-study-finds) ‘Most UK news coverage of Muslims is negative, major study finds’, and as the arms industry is a buyers market, I am happily willing to facilitate towards China, did you think that all the BS and negativity is accepted? At some point buyers will look at the other delivering parties and what the CAAT did not screw up, the Yanks themselves did, as such 2 slices of cake (a yummy multi billion dollar one) will go towards other hungry players. A setting that the media and politicians staged. So whilst the Conversation gave us a little over a week ago ‘Jamal Khashoggi: why the US is unlikely to deliver justice for the murdered journalist’ (at https://theconversation.com/jamal-khashoggi-why-the-us-is-unlikely-to-deliver-justice-for-the-murdered-journalist-156165) with the part that is essential “the White House has tried to send signals to Saudi Arabia and may not favour Prince Mohammed, it is likely he will take over the throne from his father and rule the kingdom for decades to come. The Biden administration may dislike Prince Mohammed personally, but they will probably need to work with him if the US is to maintain a working relationship with Saudi Arabia”, in this the US has no options, they have the option of releasing actual evidence, but I would not hold my breath on that one. They need to find a way to restore billions in optional lost revenue and I hope they lose out so I can get my dream house. You see in a commercial world it is about who has the goods and who can deliver the goods and at present Saudi Arabia has the cash. So whilst we see more and more visible BS on a whodunnit level whilst the evidence is a lot less than the one Ellery Queen ever had to work with. 

And in all this the media has a much larger role to play, a lot more than you think. And if one would ask Miqdaad Versi of the Muslim Council of Britain today, I wonder how the stage has negatively reverted. Even as we saw then “The findings come amid growing scrutiny of Islamophobia in the Conservative party and whether its roots lie in rightwing media coverage.” It is a much larger setting, it is the media in general, for them Islam is an easy mark to have, a mark that upsets the least and that is where the shareholders and stakeholders are most likely to be, the creation of emotional flames and the Khashoggi flame was one of the brightest they had seen in a decade as such Saudi bashing continues. We see an alternative/additional version in Judith Escribano article “In The role of the media in the spread of Islamophobia Sam Woolfe argues that “the media uses bold and harsh language to promote this kind of fear because bad news sells”. This constant drip feed of bad news focussed on Muslims and Islam merely “propagates and reinforces negative stereotypes of Muslims (e.g. that Muslims are terrorists, criminals, violent or barbaric)”” (at https://www.islamic-relief.org.uk/islamophobia-in-the-media-enough-is-enough/), I disagree in part. You see the media never had their ducks in a row and to sell advertisements, they need to turn the people into ‘click bitches’, the more emotional an article is, the more enflaming an article is, the better the changes of a click and a click translates to roughly $0.01-$0.03 per person per visit, as such the media flames as much as they can every day. They never realised the setting has no long term benefit and I reckon that is why the Australian one is crying like little bitches against mean mean mean Google (and its papa Smurf Sergey Brin). 

So how do Prince Harry and Meghan relate to Saudi Arabia and Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman? Emotion! Emotion is the stage that levels the playing field for the media, a stage that enraged millions, make them click on their website, the ultimate click bitch paradox that is as close to a perfect digital storm as we are likely to see in the next decade, that is until Iran does something extreme again, but I set a new stealth weapon system online for the innovator to turn into something factual and sink their navy, I roll like that.

The problem with the stage we see is that for the most, the media refuses to investigate the media and the moment they figure out that they are under investigation, we will see all kinds of barricades. Even the Guardian (one of the more reputable ones) gave us a day ago ‘What is journalism for? The short answer: truth’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/11/journalism-truth-strong-regulation-us-media-uk) there is nothing wrong with the article, but consider the stage they start up with “Who, what, where, when and why? Five questions that are at the heart of our trade. Answer those questions in relation to any news story, and we’re doing our jobs as journalists” and that stage is not wrong, but there is a setting between editor and journalist that is missing and that accounts for filtered information versus news. In this filtered information is news that has been approved by the shareholders, the stakeholders and the advertisers. That difference is at the core of Islamophobia, the false accusations against Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, the continued covering of a columnist that vanished years ago and almost no one cares about. It is smitten with the essential need for digital revenue. That is at the heart of it all and whilst the royal stage might depose Saudi Arabia from a number one digital bashing position it is a mere temporary one. In 2009 James Murdoch gave us “The only reliable, durable, and perpetual guarantor of independence is profit”, and how can the news be profitable? When the news is filtered and for the most (and more secure way) to the extent that meets with the approval of share holders and stake holders, yet how independent is that exactly?

I apologise for sounding like a broken record, but this stuff is important, and when the escalations start you will see why, which is why I hope you are on the ball before that happens. Have fun!

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

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

February 15, 2021 · 09:43

From drain to sewer

To be honest, I am not surprised. In this day and age of overruling greed and the lack of care I see a change and this change will set woe to Australia and its local brands. It all started with overly stupid shareholders and stake holders, who engaged greed driven politicians on prolonging the lifestyle that some would and should never have been allowed to continue. I am of course talking on those relying on journalism. This is not about the journalists, although they are not entirely without blame. The news was happy to side with a player who has less than 5% of the market. So they were happy to go towards a player who has a mere 1/20 slice of the advertisement cake, this was never about fair, or about realism. 

In the first when we see “Under the proposed bill digital platforms would be required to pay media companies for content” EVERYONE is ignoring the part where the media can decide not to be on the digital format, they can decide not to post their messages on Google Search or place them on Facebook. So why is it an option. It is like advertising on the Yellow Pages and demanding the Yellow Pages for payment for the privilege of showing these articles. The ACCC and a few other players were happy to ignore that part, in addition we see them ignoring the fact that some of these papers have articles that ALWAYS push the link to a payment portal. There is more, these greed driven silly people relied on Microsoft and their Bing flaw to take the forefront into staging the response of “both would have to better compensate news publications for displaying their content, as well as give outlets more information about their search and newsfeed algorithms”, in this, the stage of ‘better compensate news publications’ as well as ‘give outlets more information about their search and newsfeed algorithms’, in this Microsoft who only has at best 5% is eager to increase its market share, yet there is a reason that they only have 5% and the news is only getting worse. As Australia moves away from Google search, they are cutting their fingers in a few more places as well. As silly people are all about their personal gains and personal wealth, the idiots owning the media that they are demanding payment for are all in a stage that they never understood in the first place. The Conversation gives us ‘The old news business model is broken: making Google and Facebook pay won’t save journalism’ (at https://theconversation.com/the-old-news-business-model-is-broken-making-google-and-facebook-pay-wont-save-journalism-150357). There we see “The code is meant to help alleviate the revenue crisis facing news publishers. Over the past two decades they have made deep cuts to newsrooms. Scores of local print papers have become “digital only” or been shut down completely”, as such, we seem to overlook that the elderly owning news media (example the Murdoch wannabe’s) never understood the digital part. We optionally see this in “To understand why the commercial news model is so broken, we first need to recognise what the primary business of commercial news media has been: attracting an audience that can be sold to advertisers”, Google already has the audience and Microsoft wants them too, so silly people (optionally including the politicians) are setting a slippery slope and Australia is about to lose whatever global foothold they have. In this the silly people are clueless on the damage that will hit. 

This is seen in two parts, the first is “2021 Cloud Report from Cockroach Labs ranked Google Cloud Platform as the best-performing of the three major public cloud platforms, offering an impressive threefold advantage in throughput capability”, so not only is Microsoft out of options, they are severely outclassed by Google (and optionally IBM as well), a stage that is influencing a global stage that we see (at https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/consumer-industrial-products/articles/global-powers-of-retailing.html#), so consider the players that have some global visibility. Players like Wesfarmers, Woolworths and JB HiFi. All players that were until 2020 in the top 250, now consider that they are removed from that field. This is because Microsoft does not count on the global field, not with a mere 5%, 7% on the global stage, we get it that Microsoft wants it desperately, but the silly people never realised that the media is now influencing a stage where others will no longer count as well. It is the purest form of ‘Think local, act global’ it would sound nice, but it merely makes Australian brands no longer a global player, a stage that will make New Zealand the number one consumer target for Australian brands and wherever they are second place, they become obsolete. The ACCC should be proud of not comprehending the larger stage. And in all this as the Conversation informs us of “before 2000 print media attracted nearly 60% of Australian advertiser dollars, according to an analysis for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s Digital Platforms Inquiry. By 2017 it was just 12%”, we see the initial folly, it almost reads like the setting of Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin where we see ‘There go the people. I must follow them, for I am their leader’, but the media was never a leader in the digital media (or media for that matter), they were merely facilitators to shareholders and stake holders, as such ‘their’ people are already the population of planet Google and Microsoft wants to annex that population in any way they can. So whilst the ACCC is setting a Microsoft stage, the media is still clueless on what is required. As we see “the core of the problem is that funding such journalism through advertising is no longer viable. Other solutions are needed – locally and nationally – to ensure its survival”, it is the larger setting they all relied on advertisers, advertiser whores for a better reference, yet in all this the newspapers are all drowning most pages in advertisements, it is partial evidence of remaining clueless. The owners needed to act over a decade ago, that is seen in the decrease from 60% to 12%, a decade of decrease and nothing was done and now that they are desperate Microsoft steps in, they will save the day, or so they say but will they? They only have a 7% global penetration, they did this to themselves by forgetting that the consumer had become in charge to some degree, it is what Google wanted all along, they merely became the facilitator of whatever the consumer required and requested, the media does not understand as they think that they are the centre of the universe, but in a global setting with thousands of voices they are merely a discord in a choir at best. 

So as the small players listening to the media are throwing away whatever options they have to the media, the media is locally acting to fill its pockets, although they will not see it that way and Microsoft is in a stage where they gain 25,000,000 bing users. And in that stage where 5G passes Microsoft by, the Australians will see a decade of hardship with no future options at all. Well some players will proclaim in their presentations that this is not the case, but when their presentations run dry and when we get to 2023 and players like Wesfarmers, Woolworths and JB HiFi will no longer be on a top 500 list, at that point some people will wonder why they listened to the silly people. I can only hope that my IP is sold before that because the hardship Australia faces with no global audience is not one I hope to rely on, and when you realise just how dangerous this setting is, you will not want that either.

In this when you realise that the media pushed you to a room in the sewer with that view, will you finally realise that the media, their shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers have sold you a bag of goods whilst calling it ‘life on quality street’? Who will you hold accountable the moment you realise that?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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