#rbc answers asks games | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

lifeofalaurie · 6 years

Text

my uwc story

i remember reading through uwc blogs when i had just found out about uwc and when i was applying and going through all those months of WAITING for the next step...and they were so helpful. im so glad these exist

i first found out uwc through my brother’s friend, who actually went to UWC atlantic college (where im headed!!!!) a few years back. it was one ordinary saturday afternoon (idk if it was actually saturday but that sounds right) and we were carpooling with said friend (usually i dont participate in these but i happened to be in the car that day) and we were talking about next year and whatever and she just kinda said that she wasn’t going to be back next year bc she was going to this ‘abroad’ program. i didnt even really think about it that much. i in fact forgot about it after that...apparently my dad did not.

so my dad would talk about it here and there but i was NOT INTERESTED for that whole year..then...i started researching a bit myself and thought oh this sounds kind of cool. i still didn't really get what UWC even was or if was even a legit thing. it just sounded like another boarding school (a huge NO for me). then i saw that there was a such thing as a “short program” (or maybe someone actually told me about it) and i decided to apply for the one at the USA campus in New Mexico. i remember writing the essays over winter break and thinking they were pretty terrible (there was also a skype interview involved and that was rough) so i was pretty shocked when i found out i had gotten in but it worked out well bc my fam was going to arizona anyway a week before that so i just flew to new mexico myself after that (i say that casually but we had to cancel tickets and get new ones so that i could go to new mexico instead of home PLUS i had to fly for myself for the first time and i was pretty confused). (also, the program is called global leadership forum or GLF)

after hermit’s peak hike (ALL UPHILL FOR A SOLID 4-5 HOURS) i think it was like 8 miles IDK. view was so nice though 10/10

GLF turned out to be an amazing experience and really solidified my trust in UWC and confirmed to me that it was indeed a real thing. i really loved how much we did in those 2 and half weeks or so - camping, hiking, interacting w wolves, having important discussions - and it really pushed me to decide to apply to UWC for real. maybe ill talk more about it in another post!!!!

ok so coming home i did even more research and really really started liking UWC and decided that i might as well try to apply. i knew they never had a certain ‘criteria’ for students but i also knew it was a long and stressful process and involved really digging deep so i really didn’t think much of it (didn’t think i really had a chance) after submitting my written application. and then began the long waiting game...

here’s a nice picture of the sky @ a wolf reservation! just wanted to add a nice pic

i never joined any of those fb groups or college confidential things for applicants and good thing bc looking at some of them now stress me out so i wouldve probably been even more stressed if i had been involved in that. also i didnt even know they existed until later so thats also probably why.

anyway i had totally forgotten about UWC (more like i was sure they’d forgotten about me or there had been something wrong like my application wasn’t submitted or something) bc i didnt hear back until the end of november (i submitted the application early october). but finding out i was a semifinalist was kind of traumatic bc in my GLF snapchat group one of my friends (who’s going to Pearson this year!!!) said he’d moved on to the next stage and i hadn’t GOTTEN ANY EMAIL. i think i just accepted it that that was the end. but then a few hours passed when i finally decided to check a different email and, alas, there it was. so a few days later, i got an email from my interviewer when we should do our skype interview and it turned out to be the same day i was taking the ACT. good

the interview turned out to be completely ok and actually really great (enjoyable even!!?). if youre at that stage, seriously the best advice i have is to just chill and be honest when youre answering. also, make it more like a conversation rather than the interviewers (yes there are prob going to be more than 1 but i assure u its ok) asking u questions back and forth. think of it as a conversation- that helped me so much to relax. the interviewers just wants to talk to you and find out what kind of person you are and if youre the same one that wrote all those deep meaningful essays from the written application - so if you were honest from the start youll be completely fine...if not, well..sry

after that, school and extracurriculars and life really went up for me and i just forgot about UWC again. i never really told any of my friends about it or anyone except for my parents. i kind of wanted it to be a personal thing- get in or not in the end.

after a really good last day of school before winter break, i went to the town library (lol) and checked my phone and therE IT WAS. I WAS A FINALIST WHICH MEANT I WOULD BE GOING TO THE UWC USA CAMPUS FOR FINALIST WEEKEND. did not know what to expect

waiting for finalist weekend felt looooong

but it came

i flew there myself AND IT WASNT EVEN DIRECT and i remember feeling so independent and proud for making it. it turned out i was one of the later ones and in the last group to be bussed over (but i met a friend on the bus who i still talk to here and there who is going to RBC this yr!!). we were so late we missed the initial meeting and first night of activities and just went straight to the hotel. at the hotel i saw my interviewer and she gave me a hug (<3) and that helped calm me down and it was also really nice to see her in person bc i remember really liking her during our skype interview. then finalist weekend happened. and im pretty sure im not supposed to expose the process so all i can say was that it was actually so genuinely fun and a real good time

UWC USA <3

at the end we all exchanged social media and fb and all that and started a messenger group chat -- as nice as it was to be able to connect to everyone, i think it really stressed everyone out. they told us that results would come out early that week (FALSE). THAT WEEK AFTER FINALIST WEEKEND WAS THE MOST STRESSFUL THING EVER. IT TOOK YEARS FOR IT TO GO BY. i remember constantly checking my email between classes and everyone in the group chat wondering if anyone had heard. then on wed night, we all got an email that said the results would be notified by friday instead. the worst

i remember that friday evening i was packing for my first hackathon (it was fun) and thinking the call wouldnt come until later that night. people were freaking out all over the group chat. then, as i was scrambling packing my sweatpants into my bag, the home phone started ringing and i ran..RAN TO THE PHONE. it said my interviewer’s name on the caller ID and i was like OK THIS I S REAL. and i picked it up and it turned out i was too late so i frantically called back probably 10 times on multiple different phones (my efforts did not work). but then, i got a call to the home phone again and it was her so i picked up RIGHT AWAY and when she told me... i kid you not that i screamed and ran around my house a few times. so thats it. it was kind of a really long and sstressful process for sure, but SOO WORTH IT. i definitely learned a lot just from that process bc it makes you think and reflect a lot all throughout. weeee

if youre even thinking about applying please GO FOR IT (well as long as ur in the right age limit, 16-18.... and also make sure you’ve done some research to get a feel for it).. but just DO IT. and u can ask me questions if u want and ill answer to the best of my personal ability (but remember that im just one person and one experience and each person’s experience is completely different)

here is the general website btw:

https://www.uwc.org/

i will probably do another post to explain UWC - at least in my own words and perspective!

<3 <3 <3

11 notes · View notes

reidsbookclub · 2 years

Note

Assumptions:

Boldecia should have come out to play more ;)

ok so this is either Katie or Zahra and no no no never ever again. omg I still cant believe I let you all talk me into that

@leftoverenvy @writingquillsandpainpills

#rbc answers asks games

9 notes · View notes

domyhomeworkhelp · 5 years

Text

Just need to do the highlighted three short answer question and references not required. BIOL2044 Human Physiology 2: Body Systems Blood/immunity practical/workshop: Blood typing and haematocrit Learning…

Recent Question/Assignment Just need to do the highlighted three short answer question and references not required. BIOL2044 Human Physiology 2: Body Systems Blood/immunity practical/workshop: Blood typing and haematocrit Learning objectives At the end of this session and the accompanying lectures, students should be able to: • Define haematocrit and explain the factors that regulate erythrocyte production. • Explain the physiological basis of the ABO and RhD blood groups. • Describe the principles of blood typing, and explain why blood typing is important in blood transfusions. Pre-practical preparation Before coming to the practical please read these practical notes and the recommended sections of the prescribed textbook (Silverthorn’s Human Physiology 7th edition: pg 535 – 47 [elements of blood] and 801 – 802 [blood group and typing]). Based on your readings, please complete the tables below. Table 1: Pre-practical preparation for Activity 1 & 2. Provide a brief (1 – 2 sentences) description for each of the following. Term Definition erythrocyte leukocyte haemoglobin haematopoiesis erythropoietin haematocrit mean corpuscular volume antigen antibody agglutination Table 2: Pre-practical preparation for Activity 2. Complete the table, identifying the red blood cell antigens and plasma antibodies that will be present in each of the ABO blood groups ABO blood group RBC antigens Plasma antibodies A B AB O Practical class learning activities There are two main learning activities: the first focuses on factors that regulate red blood cell production, whilst the second explores blood groups and blood typing. For each task, work through the questions and activities in order, asking the teaching staff for assistance where necessary. Activity 1 – Blood and blood cell production Background Blood is approximately 8% of body weight. The average volume of blood in healthy adult males is 5-6 L, which is more than that seen in healthy adult females (4-5 L). Whole blood consists of two components – a fluid part, called plasma (~55% by volume), and a solid part, called the formed elements (~45% by volume). These formed elements are the living blood cells (eg. erythrocytes or red blood cells [RBC], leukocytes or white blood cells [WBC], and platelets) suspended in the plasma. The leukocytes are further subdivided into granulocytes (basophils, neutrophils, eosinophils), lymphocytes and monocytes. Blood is transported around the body by the circulatory system. The main blood vessels responsible for carrying blood around the body are the arteries (which generally carry oxygenated blood) and veins (which generally carry deoxygenated blood). The normal pH range of blood is 7.35 – 7.45. Some of the major functions of blood include: (1) Distribution of oxygen and nutrients to all cells; (2) Removal of excretory wastes from cells; (3) Regulation of body temperature, pH and fluid volume; and (4) Protection (eg. blood clotting, antibodies). Erythrocytes are anucleate (lacking a nucleus) and have a concave shape that allows them to travel freely through the circulatory system. The main protein found in these cells is haemoglobin that carries O2 and CO2 around the body. Haemoglobin is composed of two parts – haem (~4% weight comprised of iron and porphyrin) and globin (a protein that comprises ~96% of haemoglobin weight). The formation of blood cells is called haematopoiesis and occurs in the bone marrow. All formed elements in the blood originate from a progenitor haematopoietic stem cell. The process of erythrocyte (RBC) formation is called erythropoiesis. The production of RBCs is primarily regulated by the hormone erythropoietin. The synthesis and release of erythropoietin is stimulated by hypoxia (low oxygen levels). Anaemias can can be characterised by low haemoglobin concentration, red cell count, and haematocrit, may represent acute or chronic blood loss, excessive haemolysis, or deficient blood production. The haematocrit is a measurement of the concentration of erythrocytes in the total volume of blood. It is expressed as the percentage of erythrocytes in the total blood volume and may also be called the packed cell volume (PCV). Learning activities & discussion questions 1. What does haematocrit measure? a) What sort of situations would lead to an increase in haematocrit? b) What sort of situations would lead to a decrease in haematocrit? 2. Janet is a healthy 42 year old female who has been on a 2 month holiday in Nepal, where she trekked to Everest base camp. Two days after her return, she is sent for a complete blood count. Identify what sort of changes you would expect to see in each of the following parameters, and explain your reasoning. o Haematocrit o RBC count o WBC count o Mean corpuscular volume 3. Scientists have developed a synthetic version of erythropoietin using recombinant DNA technology, and this product is currently in clinical use. a) What is erythropoietin? b) What clinical conditions might be treated with erythropoietin? 4. In sports, erythropoietin is banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency because it is a performance-enhancing drug. a) How would erythropoietin enhance sporting performance? b) What type of athletes would be most likely to see performance-enhancing effects with erythropoietin? c) Misuse of erythropoietin increases the risk of heart disease, stroke, and pulmonary embolism. Why is this the case? Activity 2 – Blood groups and blood typing Background Red blood cells have a range of different cell surface markers or antigens. There are over 30 different groups of RBC antigens, and the presence or absence of these different antigens are what determines an individual’s blood group. Two important groups of antigens are the ABO blood group antigens and the Rhesus (Rh) antigens. The ABO antigens are based on two cell surface antigens found on erythrocytes, A and B. These antigens are genetically inherited, so an individual may have antigen A, antigen B, both antigens (blood group AB), or neither antigen (blood group O). The plasma can also contain antibodies (or agglutinins) to the antigens found on the erythrocytes. These antibodies will be formed against the ABO antigens that are NOT present on a person’s RBCs. If these antibodies come into contact with their corresponding antigen, they can cause agglutination and destruction of the RBCs. Blood typing is therefore critical for blood transfusions, to ensure that transfusion reactions do not occur. In blood typing for ABO groups, antisera containing anti-A and anti-B antibodies are added to blood samples. If the RBCs in the blood sample contain the corresponding antigen, agglutination of the cells will visible. Another important system is the Rhesus system (Rh). There are many different Rh group antigens, however the RhD antigen is what we are usually referring to when we talk about an individual being ‘Rh-positive’ or ‘Rh-negative’. Unlike the ABO system, there is no pre-formed Anti-D antibody found in the blood. However, a RhD-negative person can make Anti-D antibodies following exposure to RhDpositive blood. Differences in the Rh D antigen status between mother and child can lead to hemolytic disease of the newborn. This condition can occur when a pregnant RhD- female has a baby which has inherited RhD+ blood from its father. If the mother has been previously exposed to RhD+ blood (such as during a previous pregnancy with a RhD+ foetus), this can activate the mothers immune system and lead to the formation of RhD antibodies in the mother. If the mother has a subsequent pregnancy with a RhD+ foetus, the maternal RhD antibodies can attack the developing foetus. The mothers antibodies bind to the foetal erythrocytes and haemolyse them. In some cases this can cause the death of the foetus depending on the intensity of the immune response. RhD- mothers who have had an RhD+ pregnancy are given an injection of the drug Rho-GAM after delivery. This prevents the mother from making antibodies against RhD+ blood, thereby preventing an immune attack against a future RhD+ foetus. 1. Look at the images provided in the practical class. For each example: o Identify the RBC antigens and antibodies that will be present in the blood sample o Identify the blood group of that individual Sample Blood group RBC antigens Antibodies 1 2 3 4 2. What would happen if a person with type O blood receives a whole blood transfusion from a type B donor? 3. What would happen if a person with type AB blood receives a transfusion of red blood cells from a type B donor? 4. Blood donors with O negative type blood are sometimes referred to as ‘universal donors’. Why is this? 5. What determines whether an individual is RhD-positive or RhD-negative? 6. Why is the Rh status of both mother and child particularly important in pregnant women? 7. Looking back at your answers to question 1, identify which blood groups each person could donate blood to, and which blood groups they could receive blood from. Sample Blood group Could donate to Could receive from 1 2 3 4 To help you with this there is an online blood typing game to reinforce your understanding of blood groups and blood typing. Select ‘quick game – random patients’ if you do not want to register. http://bit.ly/2oHUrwM Questions for online practical submission SAQ 1. Nick Jones is an RMIT student who is taking a ‘gap year’, and spends 6 months living at altidtude in the Andes in South America. Whilst living in the Andes, his haematocrit increases. Explain why his haematocrit has increased, and the physiological mechanisms that are responsible this increase in haematocrit. (2 marks) SAQ 2. Jane Smith is a RhD-negative mother who is 28 weeks into her second pregnancy with a RhD-positive foetus. Jane has her blood tested as part of her routine ante-natal care, and is found to have antibodies to RhD. Explain the most likely reason for why Jane Smith has antibodies to RhD in her blood. (1 mark) SAQ 3. The following table shows the blood typing observations for two different patients. For each patient, identify their blood group (both ABO and RhD), and briefly explain your reasoning for each patient. (2 marks) Patient Anti-A Anti-B Anti-D Patient Jones Agglutination No agglutination Agglutination Patient Smith Agglutination Agglutination No agglutination Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Do you need any assistance with this question? Send us your paper details now We’ll find the best professional writer for you!

Click Here To Get Started

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

Is Economy Better Under Democrats Or Republicans

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/is-economy-better-under-democrats-or-republicans/

Is Economy Better Under Democrats Or Republicans

Democratic Presidents Are Better For The Stock Market And Economy Than Republicans One Study Shows

Contrary to popular belief, the stock market and economy have performed better under Democratic presidents than it has under Republican presidents, according to data going back to 1946.

Liberum, a UK-based investment bank, pointed to historical stock market returns and annual GDP growth to make the case that a Republican president’s drive to cut taxes and reduce government spending often leads to lower economic expansion and stock market returns than when a Democratic president is in office.

Since 1947, the S&P 500 has posted a total annual return of 10.8% under Democratic presidents, versus 5.6% under Republican presidents.

And if you exclude the Great Recession and COVID-19 pandemic, both of which happened under a Republican president, the data still points to stronger returns for Democratic presidents versus Republican presidents.

Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

It’s a widely held view that Republican presidents are better for the economy and stock market than Democratic presidents, because of their drive to cut taxes and reduce government spending. But the data says otherwise.

According to an August 21 note from Liberum, a UK-based investment bank, historical stock market returns and gross domestic product data points to a stronger economic expansion under Democratic presidents than under Republican presidents.

Read more: RBC says buy these 48 stocks spanning every industry that are poised to crush the market if Donald Trump wins reelection

Bush Was The Last President To Inherit A Budget Surplus And Started Running A Deficit Obama Cut It Though Trump Ran Bigger Ones As A Result Of His Tax Cuts And The Federal Response To The Pandemic

The federal deficit is the gap between tax revenue and federal spending. During periods of growth, the deficit tends to shrink because government spending on safety net benefits lessens.

Bush inherited a budget surplus of $128 billion for fiscal year 2001. It was the last time the US had money left over. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as a series of tax cuts, erased it and increased the deficit.

Obama ran large deficits to end the Great Recession, passing an $830 billion stimulus package in 2009. He later cut the deficit over half by the time he left office.

Similar to Obama and Bush, Trump has also relied on deficit spending. It widened by $1.5 trillion with the passage of the 2017 GOP tax cuts, contrary to the administration’s claims that the law would pay for itself.

The pandemic, however, prompted $3 trillion in federal spending many economists say was needed to address the public health and economic crises.

Does The Economy Do Better Under Democrats Or Republicans

In the rough and tumble of presidential campaigns — rougher this year than ever before — facts are sometimes lost in the debate. But one fact that voters should keep in mind — one that is incontrovertible — is that the U.S. economy performs better under Democratic presidents than Republican ones.

Conservatives have long claimed that they are better stewards of the economy. Most recently, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump promised to be “the greatest jobs president that God ever created.” They have repeated these claims so relentlessly and with such confidence that millions of Americans believe them to be true. The record shows otherwise.

Research from Princeton University economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson finds that, since World War II, the economy has performed substantially better by virtually every measure when Democrats have been in the White House. GDP growth, job creation and industrial production have all been stronger during Democratic administrations than during Republican ones.

As the Ranking Member of the Joint Economic Committee, I asked my staff to review the Blinder and Watson findings. They were able to update and build on the economists’ analysis and found that on average since World War II, real GDP has grown about 1.6 times faster and private-sector jobs have grown nearly 2.5 times faster under Democrats than Republicans.

Let’s let the real debate over the economy begin.

Which Presidents Have Delivered The Best Stock Returns So Far Democrats Are Dominating

According to Siegel, author of the 1994 investment classic Stocks For The Long Run, Wall Streets obsession with politics is mostly misplaced: Bull markets and bear markets come and go, and its more to do with business cycles than presidents. In some ways the current environment has characteristics of the existential threat faced by George W. Bush post-2001 , the civil unrest that plagued the Johnson and Nixon administrations and Ronald Reagans trade war with Japan in the 1980s.

In an effort to more closely examine the relationship between the actions of a president and the direction of stocks, Forbes has analyzed their stock market performances, including dividends, dating back to Harry Truman. Using data from the National Bureau of Economic Research , weve also noted for each president the number of expansions and recessions that began during their tenures. In some cases like the presidency of Bill Clinton, who was in office during one of the most impressive periods of economic prosperity in history, you won’t see an expansion listed. Thats because credit is awarded to the president who was in office during its inception, which in this case was George H.W. Bush. We also included the ratio of gross federal debt to GDP for the final year of each presidency.

Presidential portraits courtesy of the National Archives and Records Administration

Donating = Changing Economics And Changing The World

Evonomics is free, its a labor of love, and it’s an expense. We spend hundreds of hours and lots of dollars each month creating, curating, and promoting content that drives the next evolution of economics. If you’re like us if you think theres a key leverage point here for making the world a better place please consider donating. Well use your donation to deliver even more game-changing content, and to spread the word about that content to influential thinkers far and wide.

MONTHLY DONATION

Whos Better For The Economy: Democrats Or Republicans

Who does a better job at managing the American economy: Democrats or Republicans?

Whose policies help the country and whose policies hurt it? Who should get credit when things are going well and who should take the blame when the economy slips?

But before we use the EPI to answer the question, we have to figure out how to measure the problem. It is impossible to break down every piece of legislation to see how it affected the performance of the overall economy. We can examine a few key policies, but that doesnt really answer whether one political party does a better job altogether; it only sheds light on that particular piece of legislationone small piece of a very big puzzle.

So how do we measure the effectiveness of one partys politics?

Do Dems Run The Economy Better Nope

Its a Democratic campaign consultants dream: a study from two respected academic economists concluding that, since the late 1940s, the economy has consistently performed better under Democratic presidents than under Republican ones. The gap is huge. From 1949 to 2013 a period when the White House was roughly split between parties the economy grew at an average annual rate of 3.33 percent, but growth under Democratic presidents averaged 4.35 percent and under Republicans, 2.54 percent. Jobs, stocks and living standards all advanced faster under Democrats.

Not surprisingly, one of the reports authors is a well-known Democratic economist, Alan Blinder, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve now at Princeton University; the other author, Mark Watson, also at Princeton, is a highly regarded scholar of economic statistics who describes himself as nonpartisan. More interesting, Blinder and Watson dont credit the Democratic advantage to superior policies.

Democrats would no doubt like to attribute the large growth gap to macroeconomic policy choices, but the data do not support such a claim, they write. Most economists, they note, doubt presidents can control the economy.

So if presidents didnt do it, who or what did? Blinder and Watson march through economic studies. Their conclusion: About half of the Democrats advantage reflected good luck favorable outside events or trends. Three dominate.

Conservatives Love To Tout Their Economic Bona Fides But The Data Reveal A Far Different Story

As the 2016 election cycle heats up, the key question at stake for most Americans is economic growth and jobs. The debate, then, will center around what to do with the fragile recovery that overwhelmingly benefits the rich; the stagnation of middle class incomes; and unemployment — which, particularly for young people of color, remains dispiritingly high.

The right likes to argue that these conditions mark a clear failure of progressive policies, and in particular of the Obama administration. In the process, they reject policies that have, however imperfect, unequivocally strengthened the economy over the past seven years, such as the stimulus packages that came in response to the economic crisis.

Meanwhile, while conservatives often claim that their policies are good for the middle class, systematic studies by economists, political scientists and sociologists suggest these claims are overblown.

Economic Growth

At the heart of the question is economic growth: Which party is better at delivering it?

While economic growth alone is not sufficient for middle class and working class income growth, it is certainly necessary. The most systematic investigation of how parties affect economic growth was performed by economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson. Their results are unequivocal:

Inequality

The chart below suggests this effect is driven by both market conditioning and redistribution .

Unemployment

Taxes

Race

So Democrats Are Worse

We look at the differences in economic scores between Democrats and Republicans and judge it to be a draw. The Democrats score may reflect that they had to manage the economy under difficult circumstances, including the Great Depression and the Great Recession. Then again, Republicans enjoyed a booming economy during the Roaring Twenties and the late 90s. If we could control for those shocks, we might find the two parties positions switched. Moreover, our approach cannot establish causality . All we can view is the correlation .However, we could use a regression analysis to look for time connections between one party coming to power and the subsequent performance of the economy. This approach would actually allow us to look for empirical causality. We wanted to isolate economic policies from exogenous shocks, so that we were truly comparing apples to apples. Democrats would not be docked for the Great Depression and WWII, while the Republicans would not get a boost from globalization, etc.

To do this, we subtracted the smoothed trend from the EPI scores. Then, we conducted a regression of the EPI deviation from its trend against the IPP.

This way, there could be no disputing whether the economy was up or down because of factors beyond the respective partys control.

Our regression analysis found no statistically significant causality. Which is fine and happens often.

Diversify Into Real Estate

Stock market performance has been strong over time. The same can be said for real estate. Given interest rates have come way down, the value of rental income and cash flow have gone way up. Therefore, Im personally buying multifamily properties and rental properties for capital appreciation and income. Stocks also tend to be more volatile than real estate.

One of the best ways to invest in real estate is through real estate crowdfunding. My favorite two real estate crowdfunding platforms are:

Fundrise: A way for accredited and non-accredited investors to diversify into real estate through private eREITs. Fundrise has been around since 2012 and has consistently generated steady returns, no matter what the stock market is doing.

CrowdStreet: A way for accredited investors to invest in individual real estate opportunities mostly in 18-hour cities. 18-hour cities are secondary cities with lower valuations, higher rental yields. They also have potentially higher growth due to job growth and demographic trends.

Ive personally invested $810,000 in real estate crowdfunding since 2016 to diversify my investments. Its nice to earn income 100% passively as I spend more time taking care of my children.

Filed Under: Investments

I spent 13 years working at Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse. In 1999, I earned my BA from William & Mary and in 2006, I received my MBA from UC Berkeley.

Current recommendations:

The Index Of Political Power

It stands to reason that the more policy-making positions one party holds, the more policies that party will implement. If one party controls a majority of Congress, for example, then more of that partys policies will likely get passed than the other partys. Therefore, we could measure how many positions each party held, and then use that as a proxy to assume that more of that partys ideas were being enacted.

Obviously, such a measure should include the legislative bodies of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Since the president signs or vetoes legislation into law, that position should be included, too. Even though the Supreme Court can overturn a law, we should not include the judicial body. Many of its decisions are related to social policies rather than economic ones; its impact on the economy, as far as this Index is concerned, is negligible.

However, there is another area outside of legislative control that we should include in this proxy measure: the monetary policy. As we explained earlier, the countrys monetary stance is a critical component of the economys performance. But Congress does not control monetary policythe Federal Reserve does. By tradition, the Fed follows the decisions of its chairman. In effect, the nations monetary policy is determined by one individual. Logically, then, we should include the political party of this position, too.

our Index of Political Power

Recessions And The White House

The statement by Occupy Democrats runs from the Ronald Reagan presidency, which began in January 1981, to the present.

But by using the phrase “has overseen” in connection with a recession, the statement is less than precise as to whether it refers to a recession that began during a president’s term or whether he has had to deal with a recession in his time in office.

Likewise, applying the phrase “has overseen” to a strong recovery by the Democrats leaves it unclear as to whether the statement means a president started the recovery or inherited an ongoing recovery, as President Donald Trump did from President Barack Obama.

The interpretation of the phrase “has overseen” complicates the process of fact-checking it. Obama inherited a recession from Bush II that began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009, according to NBER, the longest economic downturn since World War II.

Under that Reagan-to-Trump timeline, the Republican presidencies had four recessions start in their terms: one each under Reagan and George H. W. Bush, and two under George W. Bush. By contrast, Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama had zero.

With the economic downturn created by the coronavirus pandemic, a recession is likely to be declared after the latest GDP data is released, sometime in July. We may be in one now, but it has not been deemed official.

Wages Grew Steadily Under Bush And Slowed Under Obama They Started Picking Up Again Under Trump But The Pandemic’s Impact Skewed This Year’s Data

Wage growth is usually a good indicator of how much the economy is benefiting average workers. But the chart above illustrates the shortfalls of relying too much on a single metric given the devastation that the pandemic has caused.

Wage gains were steady for most of the Bush administration, ranging between 2% and 4% each year. Then it took a hit during the Great Recession, and wage growth was anemic for much of the Obama presidency.

The initial years of the Trump presidency coincided with a rise in wages as the economy expanded and employers competed to hire workers. They grew above 3% starting in 2018.

Millions of low-wage workers were sidelined in the early months of the pandemic, while many higher-wage white collar workers were able to continue working remotely.

It artificially dragged up the average wage for those still able to work, according to an analysis from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. It’s expected to drop as more hourly workers regain their jobs.

Want A Better Economy Elect A Democratic President

I enjoyed David Leonhardts opinion piece in the New YorkTimes today including graphic evidence that the econmomy performed better under Democratic presidents for the last century.

A president has only limited control over the economy. And yet there has been a stark pattern in the United States for nearly a century. The economy has grown significantly faster under Democratic presidents than Republican ones.

Its true about almost any major indicator: gross domestic product, employment, incomes, productivity, even stock prices. Its true if you examine only the precise period when a president is in office, or instead assume that a presidents policies affect the economy only after a lag and dont start his economic clock until months after he takes office. The gap holds almost regardless of how you define success, two economics professors at Princeton, Alan Blinder and Mark Watson, write. They describe it as startlingly large.

Accompanying graphics tell the story, with a couple shown here.

My dad, a yellow-dog Democrat stockbroker in southern Louisiana, preached this to me until his dying day. His evidence was only anecdotal, of course, but very tangible.

The Historical Precedent For Job Gains Is Mixed

The economy didn’t substantially add jobs early on in Bush’s presidency. But it started picking up until the 2008 financial crisis.

The Obama administration moved to stem those job losses early on in his term, and the economy stabilized in 2010. With the recovery underway, employers added jobs, coming out to an average of 224,000 gains per month in Obama’s last three years.

Job growth during the Trump presidency had mostly matched its pace under Obama before 2020. In the first three years up to February, the economy added 182,000 jobs monthly on average.

But pandemic-related job losses left a crater in the economy. Many experts say it will take several years for the labor market to recover from the blow.

Everyone Does Better When The Presidents A Democrat

The numbers dont lie. The question is why every Democrat isnt talking about this all the time.

Photo Illustration by Lyne Lucien/The Daily Beast/Getty

Our two political parties have certain identities that are seared into our collective public brain. Democrats: the party of workers, of civil rights, of compassion and fairness, and of higher taxes and more regulation. Republicans: party of the rich, big business , the free market, and lower taxes and less regulation.

And because the GOP is the party of big business, it is universally assumed that Republicans are better at handling the economy. Polls typically find that people trust Democrats more on all the things that government does, which stands to reason, but trust Republicans more on handling the economy. Just last week I saw a poll in which respondents rated Biden as better equipped than Trump to handle race relations, the virus response, and two or three other things; but on the economy, Trump bested Biden 51-46.

Its hard wired, and its wrong. Dead wrong.

Simon Rosenberg heads , a liberal think tank and advocacy organization. He has spent years advising Democrats, presidents included, on how to talk about economic matters. Not long ago, he put together a little PowerPoint deck. It is fascinating. You need to know about it. The entire country needs to know about it.

The deck consists of about 15 slides, but Ill walk you through just six so you get the idea. Lets start with job creation under each president:

Financial Planning Under President Joe Biden

With Joe Biden as president, financial planning comes full circle. I retired under President Obama and I plan to retire again under Joe Biden.

Because the Democrats have control of both houses and the presidency, more taxes will be passed. There will also be more spending to help all citizens. As a result, I plan to take things down a notch once I get vaccinated or once taxes go up, whichever comes first.

Im tired of the hustle during the pandemic. Instead, I want to spend my money and live it up more. I think everybody is.

Luckily for investors, stocks and real estate have performed well during the pandemic. Therefore, we have an even larger cushion to live our lives as freely as possible.

Biden Versus Trump Some Speculate That The Future Of The Republic Hinges On The Outcome Of The Next Election But For Smart Investors It Doesn’t Really Matter Who Wins

Conventional wisdom says that those liberal Dems are generally bad for the economy and the stock market because of their big government tendencies, while fiscally conservative Republicans are good. This widely accepted belief is actually fake news if you look at data going back to the end of World War II.

Stock markets do perform better under Democrats than under Republicans. Thats a well-known fact, but it does not imply cause and effect, says Jeremy Siegel, the Russell E. Palmer Professor of Finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. From 1952 through June 2020, annualized real stock market returns under Democrats have been 10.6% compared with 4.8% for Republicans.

With the 2020 election less than four months away, some investors are fretting about the pros and cons of a Trump vs. Biden presidency. A Democratic sweep would almost certainly mean a rollback of Trumps massive corporate tax cut , but additional economic stimulus and stability on the China trade front would be a big positive.

Clinton: Economy Better Under Democrats

Hillary Clinton says the U.S. economy does better with a Democrat in the White House, citing research by two Princeton economists. But the authors of that report do not credit Democratic fiscal policies for the economic growth.

In fact, the authors say our empirical analysis does not attribute any of the partisan growth gap to fiscal or monetary policy.

Clinton has made the claim numeroustimes in recent weeks usually in the context of her economic plan, as she did during the first Democratic debate.

Clinton, Oct. 13: I have a five-point economic plan, because this inequality challenge we face, we have faced it at other points. Its absolutely right. It hasnt been this bad since the 1920s. But if you look at the Republicans versus the Democrats when it comes to economic policy, there is no comparison. The economy does better when you have a Democrat in the White House and thats why we need to have a Democrat in the White House in January 2017.

Clinton expounded on that talking point the following day during a speech in Las Vegas.

When we asked for backup, the Clinton campaign pointed us to academic research by two Princeton economists titled, Presidents and the U.S. Economy: An Econometric Exploration. The authors, Alan S. Blinder and Mark W. Watson, concluded after researching an array of economic statistics that the economy has performed much better when a Democrat is president than when a Republican is.

Why Does The Us Economy Perform Better Under Democrats Than Republicans

Since Carter, no Democratic President has had a recession begin on their watch. At the same time, no Republican President including the single term Presidents has gotten through their time in the White House without a recession.

Despite the widely held belief that Republicans are better at managing the economy than Democrats, the history of the United States economy tells a different story. In nearly every metric one might use to measure performance, Democratic presidents have presided over greater economic growth.

Strikingly, this is not even by a slight margin. According to a paper published in 2013 by Princeton economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson, the performance gap is startlingly large so much so that it strains credulity, given how little influence over the economy most economists assign to the President of the United States.

The pair suggests that this is not due to time sensitive matters or partisan fiscal or monetary policy. Instead, they attribute this gap in large part to benign oil shocks, superior TFP performance, and more optimistic consumer expectations.

In short, they chalk it up to one part luck, another part self-fulfilling prophecy whereby consumers anticipate the economy will flourish under a Democratic leader and then drive the economy upward and a third part thats, well, a mystery.

Still, they say that it is highly unlikely that the D-R growth gap was just luck.

0 notes

reidsbookclub · 2 years

Note

🌼

hiii anon

This is such a mooooood. Also so perfect for him.

Pinterest ask game

#hi anon!!#rbc answers asks games

6 notes · View notes

mikemortgage · 5 years

Text

How an investment in a botched video game burned a government startup funding agency so badly it changed its rules

On Nov. 14, 2018, Martin Braganza, a Halifax-based account manager at the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA), typed up a briefing note as requested by the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development’s office in Ottawa.

The minister, Navdeep Bains, who is responsible for ACOA, would soon be travelling to Nova Scotia for an announcement and had to be briefed on “Hot Topics” that might be raised by reporters.

Part of Braganza’s note concerned Orpheus Interactive Inc., a defunct video-game company that owed ACOA nearly $1 million after badly botching an attempt to build a Sons of Anarchy video game. The memo also focused on James Drage, a Halifax businessman and the main figure behind Orpheus.

According to the memo, ACOA was changing the way it funds startups and had pulled away from funding fledgling video-game companies altogether, seemingly embarrassed by its highly questionable funding of Orpheus Interactive.

Federal government gave millions to Irving subsidiary, records reveal

Of government and golf courses: Mulroney's East Coast experiment, 30 years later

Here’s who gets ACOA money

At the very least, ACOA was attempting to improve its processes in part to answer questions about its due diligence and stewardship of public money, but some say it has overreacted based on the failings of one smoothing-talking entrepreneur.

There is no doubt that recent reported revelations about Drage had cast ACOA in a poor light and raised obvious concerns about the agency’s ability to select who gets access to its large supply of funding, including grants and no-interest loans.

Though perhaps not well known elsewhere, ACOA is a prominent federal agency in Atlantic Canada, with two-dozen offices across the four provinces that distributed $284 million in the 2017/18 fiscal year.

In November it was revealed that ACOA gave money to Orpheus and two other companies connected to Drage despite his checkered business record.

Drage’s most egregious dealings involved Mary Wood, a British senior who lost her life savings to Drage through two failed mortgage deals while living in Canada. A 2017 court judgement ordered Drage to repay Wood more than $200,000, but she is still waiting for her money. Now in her early 70s, Wood is back in England, relying on the charity of family and friends, doubtful she’ll ever get her money back.

But, according to court records, Drage filed for bankruptcy in 1996 and has been successfully sued numerous times throughout his career by business partners, investors, banks and even his own lawyers. Court records also show that the Royal Bank of Canada’s fraud-detection group in 2012 investigated Drage for suspected cheque kiting, a form of bank fraud.

Court records also show that the Royal Bank of Canada’s fraud-detection group in 2012 investigated James Drage for suspected cheque kiting, a form of bank fraud

Although RBC ultimately decided not to pursue the matter, the bank lost confidence in Drage and terminated his accounts. He owed the bank $112,000, after Manor Custom Homes — one of his many companies — defaulted on a loan, line of credit and business Visa. Yet he claimed a net worth of $3.8 million at the time.

That history apparently went unnoticed at ACOA. Drage’s associated companies secured nearly $2 million — at least — from ACOA between 2010 and 2015, even though he was facing litigation and a bank fraud investigation.

Internal agency documents, including Braganza’s briefing note, obtained through an Access to Information request, show that ACOA knew that revelations about funding Drage would raise serious questions about the agency’s apparent lack of controls and due diligence.

One document, summarizing the crux of the revelations, asked, “… how did a man with such a questionable legal and business history secure so much money from ACOA?”

Drage, 50, was a known entity at ACOA when he approached the agency in 2013 for money to develop an episodic video game based on the hit cable show Sons of Anarchy, which aired on FX Networks and depicted an outlaw motorcycle club in California.

His company, Orpheus, eventually landed the game’s licensing rights from 21st Century Fox. In August 2013, Drage met with Sons of Anarchy creator Kurt Sutter and executives from FX and Fox to sign the contract in Los Angeles.

Braganza served as a point of contact for Drage at ACOA, and recommended him to Duke Mighten, a comic-book artist and video-game developer who quickly became an Orpheus co-founder. Braganza knew Drage from events and conferences. Drage seemed like a well-connected businessman, an “active investor” who’d worked with ACOA on several projects.

ACOA gave Orpheus $50,000 to get started and later added two interest-free loans totalling roughly $1 million. Nova Scotia Business Inc. (NSBI), a provincial funding agency, provided $21,875, even before Orpheus secured the game rights.

The Sons of Anarchy mobile game episodes were supposed to roll out with the show’s final season in September 2014, but the project was months behind schedule. And the funding Drage promised he’d deliver — $4 million — never seemed to arrive, according to former Orpheus employees.

From the beginning, there wasn’t even enough cash to buy computers, and paycheques were often late or didn’t arrive at all.

In the end, only a single episode of the game was released (Sons of Anarchy: The Prospect), in late January 2015. Gamers who bought season passes, expecting a series of episodes, had to be refunded their money.

A still from the Sons of Anarchy: The Prospect video game by Orpheus.

In an attempt to save Orpheus, Drage secured a new chief executive, Lance Young. Based in Santa Monica, Calif., Young was a Hollywood veteran who, according to his LinkedIn profile, worked as an executive at Paramount, Warner Bros., and DreamWorks Animation, producing movies such as The Hunt for Red October, Fatal Attraction, Days of Thunder and Free Willy.

But Young couldn’t salvage Orpheus. According to ACOA documents, the company couldn’t fund its day-to-day operations and was overwhelmed by debt.

By September 2016, Nova Scotia’s Director of Labour Standards had obtained a judgment against Orpheus for nearly $120,000 in pay owed to Orpheus employees. ACOA also sued Orpheus that month, securing a default judgment ordering Orpheus to repay nearly $1 million.

Other Orpheus creditors include Ottawa-based OneKey Financial, Green Century Investment Ltd. in Toronto, and Duncan McNaughton, president of Ottawa-based Tiree Facility Solutions Inc., a management consulting and professional services company, who invested $500,000.

In the case of ACOA, the agency isn’t just chasing its Orpheus contributions. The agency is owed hundreds of thousands of dollars by two other companies connected to Drage: Email Opened, an email software company where he was a director and investor; and Dartmouth Medical Research, where he served as president.

All told, ACOA has secured judgements totalling $1.9 million against the three Drage companies.

Drage often worked under the banner of Atlantic Venture Capital Partners (AVCP), which he claims was the first private venture-capital firm in Eastern Canada. He’s still listed as managing partner.

Braganza’s briefing note to Minister Bains included the following question: “What are we doing differently as a result of our experience with AVCP/Dradge (sic)?”

The answers to that question were originally redacted, though the department later agreed to release the information.

Braganza outlined four changes, such as retreating from providing game development funding to video-game startups, noting “it’s higher risk than other startups,” and ending the practice of matching funds obtained from outside sources. Instead, ACOA now typically puts up a half or a third of the money already secured from outside investors.

Other changes included less direct “investing” in “pre-revenue” ICT companies, and taking a “phased approach” to funding so that ACOA’s contributions grow as each company grows.

ACOA would only answer questions about the changes on background. Emails and calls made to Minister Bains’s office were not returned. Repeated emails and phone calls to addresses and numbers associated with Drage were not returned.

Despite the wording of the briefing, ACOA said the changes to its funding regime are not directly related to Drage.

“This previously redacted information is not specific to a single event, but rather reflective of the Agency’s natural, on-going evolution of its investment approach,” the agency said when releasing the redacted section.

Regardless, the changes will have an impact on companies seeking funding from ACOA, which is a major source of government money in Atlantic Canada.

“It’s unfortunate to hear. It sounds to me like they’re overreacting a little bit,” said Darryl Wright, who sits on the board of the Interactive Society of Nova Scotia, a video-game industry advocacy group. “It’s kind of wrong-headed, (this) throwing the baby out with the bathwater approach that they seem to be taking.”

Wright was technical director at Orpheus until April 2015, when he quit following four consecutive missed paycheques. He said he was owed about $10,000 and recalls his time at Orpheus as a “harrowing experience.”

Now the managing director at Gogii Lighthouse Studios Inc., he argues the video-game industry is not as volatile as ACOA portrays it to be. Gogii, he notes, has been in business 12 years.

“It’s hard to imagine why (ACOA) would suddenly say we’ve had this one terrible incident so we’re going to curtail a whole industry. It seems off to me,” he added. “Reactionary.”

NSBI chief executive Laurel Broten declined to answer questions about changes her organization could make following its involvement with Drage.

But NSBI noted that its current export and small-business programs require applicants to declare outstanding or pending claims and litigation. The program Drage accessed — the now defunct Global Business Accelerator Program — did not have that requirement at the time.

In 2017, after Orpheus had failed and with creditors still owed money, Drage took part in a delegation — led by NSBI — to a kids’ entertainment summit in Miami, representing a new video-game company, Participant Games. The company, where he was listed as founder, was also part of NSBI delegations to the large Game Developers Conference (GDC) in San Francisco in 2017, and the Miami kids’ entertainment summit again in 2018.

Drage also showed up at GDC in San Francisco in 2018, though he wasn’t part of an NSBI delegation. Nevertheless, Wright was astounded. He turned to a colleague and asked: “Oh my god, is that James Drage? What is he doing here?”

Then Wright moved to the other side of the room.

Financial Post

from Financial Post https://ift.tt/2WE6TZF via IFTTT Blogger Mortgage Tumblr Mortgage Evernote Mortgage Wordpress Mortgage href="https://www.diigo.com/user/gelsi11">Diigo Mortgage

#IFTTT #Financial Post

0 notes

maysoper · 5 years

Text

Moving The Goalposts

Make no mistake that the women showed up and nearly stole the show tonight at the NHL All-Star Skills Competition. Kendall Coyne absolutely lit the ice on fire with her lap in the Fastest Skater event. Brianna Decker only went out and won the Precision Passer event. Rebecca Johnston demonstrated the hands needed in the Puck Control event. Renata Fast blew up targets in the Accuracy Shooting event. Yes, the women can play. But you already knew that. In fact, if you've been reading this blog for any length of time, you're very aware that these are four of the best hockey players on the planet. So why am I writing about goalposts moving? The women's hockey writers were all over social media tonight with their usual anger towards the NHL world in that more people should be watching the women's game. I don't disagree that more people should be supporting women's hockey with their butts in seats, merchandise on their backs, eyes on their TVs, and more. I have been a long supporter of women's hockey, and I truly believe the game is more akin to Olympic hockey with speed and skill being the highlights, and I'll take that to the grave as my reason for spending so much time watching the women's product. Here's the thing, though: the NHL is in San Jose this weekend to promote THEIR product. The invitation to the women this season followed last year's invitation of Hilary Knight, Amanda Kessel, Meghan Duggan, and Hannah Brandt to the All-Star Game in Tampa Bay where the same boisterous social media warriors got on their soapboxes, pounded fists on chests, and screamed about how people should be watching the women's game. While Coyne and Decker arguably made this year's inclusion of the women at the Skills Competition more memorable with their performances in the events they were demonstrating, I'm going to wager a bet that you won't see an uptick in attendance at women's games nor will you see any sustained support for the game after tonight's performance. Now you may be asking, "Teebz, if you support the women's game, how can you say that?". The reality is that the NHL All-Star Game is there to showcase players and their talents, but if you have no way to see this talent regularly or don't know how to watch this talent, you likely will forget how good these players are, ultimately forgetting how good they were this week. Don't be angry - that's how our minds work. There's an expression in hockey that sees teams in the Pacific time zone often using when it comes to voting on year-end awards due to the concentration of voters who live on or near the east coast of North America. This "east coast bias" term is used because most games in California start some three hours after all other games do - 10pm in most eastern markets - so the perception from the west coast is that most of the east coast has already turned off the broadcast since no one wants to stay up until 1am watching hockey. I'm not sure this holds true with the exposure that all of the NHL gets with the broadcasting deals they have - Brent Burns won the Norris Trophy in 2017 and Drew Doughty won in 2016 - but they're the only two players who play or have played in the Pacific time zone to win the award. There has yet to be a Vezina Trophy winner from the Pacific time zone, and the only Hart Trophy winners from that time zone are Corey Perry and Joe Thornton in a year where he was traded from Boston to San Jose. Why does this matter? What these writers should be howling about is the fact that you can't find women's hockey anywhere on television - the single largest media influencer in today's households. The NHL? You can find it nearly anywhere in Canada thanks to Rogers broadcasting games on Sportsnet, Sportsnet360, CityTV, and CBC. You can see men's hockey on TSN thanks to the World Junior Championship, the Spengler Cup, the World Championship, a handful of NCAA games, the RBC Cup, and a handful of other Hockey Canada-supported events. Men's hockey is everywhere in Canada, and it's why it dominates most highlight shows and sports newscasts. You know what isn't everywhere in Canada? You get three guesses. If you guessed "women's hockey on TV", you'd be a winner. Sportsnet makes it seem like they're doing the world a favour when it comes to broadcasting four regular season games, the CWHL All-Star Game, and the Clarkson Cup Final. Sportsnet owns the rights to U SPORTS broadcasting and will show the U SPORTS Men's National Hockey Championship, but doesn't even bother to send a reporter to the Women's National Hockey Championship. You know why you're all talking about Kendall Coyne's incredible lap today? Colorado's Nathan MacKinnon. Had MacKinnon not been injured, Coyne would have likely been relegated to the commercial break where she'd demonstrate how the lap around the rink would work before the cameras came back to watch the men do their best. But MacKinnon, who is a student of the game, knew there was someone who likely could hold her own when it came to speed in the rink. MacKinnon reached out to Coyne via Twitter and asked the speedy American star if she'd take his spot in the event. And did she ever!

Olympic Gold Medalist @KendallCoyne kicked off the Fastest Skater competition in style! pic.twitter.com/4Ug3dpsuja

— NHL on NBC (@NHLonNBCSports) January 26, 2019

But let's pump the breaks here because had the Skills Competition gone down according to the NHL's plans, Coyne's lap would have only been seen by those in attendance in San Jose. The fact that both NBC and Sportsnet captured her lap was because she in MacKinnon's spot as one of the actual competitors in the Fastest Skater event. See the irony? The NHL wasn't holding her back from showing off her wheels. They're trying to market their stars in their event. That's just marketing 101, and I can't fault for the NHL for making the NHL All-Star Game about the NHL and its stars. I can fault NBC and Sportsnet, though, for opting to not show the women demonstrating the skills to the public not sitting inside the SAP Center. The problem, however, goes to a larger issues within women's hockey, and that's exposure on television. Half a dozen games broadcast on TV, some YouTube games, and grainy highlights posted on social media won't get the exposure that the women's game desperately needs to become a mainstay on sports highlight shows. "What are the answers, Teebz?" you ask. Well, the first step is to follow that whole "one league" dream that everyone keeps demanding, but only two people can solve. Once that happens, this new Women's National Hockey League can fall under the NHL's watch, and I would hope that they would include a weekly televised game in both the Canada and the US on the NHL's national media partners in Sportsnet and NBC. The enemy of the women's game right now isn't the NHL or men's hockey or men or the apathy that most hockey fans show when it comes to women's hockey. Hockey Canada and USA Hockey have done their parts in making the World Championships and the Olympics must-watch TV when it comes to women's hockey, but they can't run weekly tournaments. That comes down to the two women's professional leagues, and the fact that they have no national media partner who broadcasts games regularly is the major reason why people didn't know that Kendall Coyne was one of the fastest humans on the planet before tonight. In states like Massachusetts and Minnesota, women's hockey is hugely popular because it gets its fair share of coverage locally with some regularity. Women's hockey has long been beating the drum about "you can't be what you can't see". Those are the goalposts onto which women's hockey writers should have their crosshairs fixed, and it starts with demanding that the professional women's leagues either come together to become a stronger product or by having each of the leagues going out to find a national broadcast partner. If you recall, the NHL was once mocked for putting games on the OLN network. The NHL worked through this to prove its product was a viable entity, and they've since been able to sign bigger and more lucrative deals in the United States by continuing to deliver ratings and advertising dollars to its partners. It didn't start with an NBC deal, though, and that's what the leagues and writers need to realize. Time slots on Sportsnet and NBC Sports are expensive. The networks are there to make money, and the women's game simply can't provide the same monetary return as other sports at this time just as the NHL couldn't provide the same return in 2005 when they signed with OLN. This is simply the reality of where the sport is on the sporting landscape right now, and it's a harsh reality that one needs to accept if this sport is ever to move forward. The lack of television broadcasts are the answer to "why isn't this sport more popular". The only way to fix that is to find a way onto television regularly. I'm not a television executive by any means, but I suspect that if the leagues could likely find a somewhat-obscure network to take a chance on one or both of them, then popularity of the women's game will grow by leaps and bounds as the die-hard fans turn casual fans into more dedicated fans and so on and so forth. Y'know, kind of similar to how the NHL grew in non-traditional markets in the sunbelt with local broadcasts and a national deal with an obscure television network. The goalposts need to be moved. This would certainly change the playing field if a television deal was struck. This is entirely what the women's hockey writers who are screaming about Kendall Coyne's performance tonight should be asking their leagues to investigate. If the problem with women's hockey is that no one is watching, it's time to get onto the medium that most people watch. Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice! from Sports News http://hockey-blog-in-canada.blogspot.com/2019/01/moving-goalposts.html

0 notes

jacobsmithbu · 6 years

Text

Badgers Fight

Brock refuses to slow down against Windsor even when the odds were stacked against them

Jacob Smith

The start of a busy 7 days for Brock basketball and a winter storm rolled through Bob Davis on Saturday when Brock hosted the Windsor Lancers. The men had met Windsor prior to this when they hosted the Lancers during the RBC Classic preseason tournament, but for the now 6 person women’s roster, they were trying to tackle a whole new beast.

First up was the 5 and 10 Brock women who were down to just 6 active players going up against the 11 and 4 Lancers with 11 active players. Let’s get into a rundown of the game. Windsor got off to a slow start offensively, while grabbing a lot of offensive rebounds they were unable to put the ball in the hoop on many occasions, and that kept the Badgers who were consistently finding open looks, in the game. Throughout the first half both programs looked evenly matched, scoring equally and by the end of the 2nd quarter, rebounding the same amount. Brock’s offense was once again lead by the veterans in Brooke, Baelie and Courtney, with the added 3-pointer every now and then from Miranda Smith or a fast bucket inside the key from Lauren Zonneveld. In the 2nd half things started to get away from the Badgers as the Lancers offense started to convert more chances, they made more shots, became more of a threat from beyond the arch due to several player’s abilities to shoot 3’s, and they pulled away with a larger lead. The lead didn’t come without a fight from the Badgers though.

The resiliency of the Badger program as we’ve seen over the past few games was once again shown against Windsor and their refusal to quit or give up allowed them to answer the Lancers offense several times throughout the last quarter of the game, never letting the lead extend too far. This Badgers program is turning into one that seems to thrive when the odds are stacked against them, playing as hard as they ever played and showing even more determination every game that they aren’t on a level ground with the opponent. Baelie Campbell was once again the Badgers leading scorer, while being asked to play all 40 minutes, she put up 20 points with 5 rebounds and showed not only the packed Bob Davis Gym crowd, but the coaches and the rest of her teammates that when pressure is at its highest, she doesn’t shy away from a challenge and brings her best for the group. Even though Brock fell 68-52 to Windsor, among the crowd and those watching the broadcast, I’m sure the badger pride was strong for everyone cheering for the 6 women who left everything on the court and for the women on the bench who are dealing with tough injuries.

Once the women were done energizing the crowd, the men came onto the court looking for their 14th win. The Brock men had already played Windsor ahead of this game as I mentioned so they knew exactly what they were up against, and they knew exactly how to take care of business. From tipoff until the final whistle Brock never stopped fighting, putting up basket after basket and showing Windsor that they weren’t playing around, they wanted to win at whatever cost. As they got more and more defensive stops and everyone on the team started capitalizing on offensive opportunities, the lead expanded for the Badgers, eventually giving them a 83-54 victory. 3 vets were in double figures for the Badgers, with Dani, Johneil and Cassidy recording at least 15 points as well as a combined 17 rebounds. The Badgers out-shined the Lancers in every category on the box score in their victory, proving they were the better team and like the preseason game, coming away with an easy victory.

When I mention that everyone on the team started putting up points, I mean it. With the exception of one player not scoring, everyone was putting up points against the Lancers and every man who dressed for the game had an impact in some fashion on the Badgers offense. The Badgers quickly proved to be too much to handle for the Lancers, their dynamic play along with the depth that the roster has, was unmatched by whatever Windsor threw at them throughout the game. This was yet again a great team victory for Brock and with their 2nd win in 2 meetings between the Badgers and the Lancers, a message to other teams that they will have to bring more if they want to slow the Badgers momentum.

This was just the start of a busy week for the Badgers, as they go on to play Guelph once again on Wednesday in Bob Davis Gym and then welcome Waterloo to St Catharines on Saturday for an afternoon game.

Now for a side note. This post is my 20th blog post since I started 11 weeks ago on November 5th, and a lot has went down in both Brock basketball and Raptors basketball. I have written 15 posts for Brock and 5 posts for Toronto and though this was created to be something to give Brock more attention, it has quickly escalated to a weekly thing and I cannot wait to keep posting more and more as the season goes on and into the summer. Thank you to everyone who has read one of my posts and, until next time, this has been your Recap of Brock basketball.

Social Media:

Twitter: JaySmithBall

Instagram: recapthecourt

0 notes

ilovewikishopline-blog · 7 years

Text

Walmart and Google partner on voice-based shopping

New Post has been published on https://goo.gl/vpzJSx

Walmart and Google partner on voice-based shopping

Walmart and Google are today announcing a new partnership that will enable voice shopping through Google Assistant, Google’s virtual assistant that lives on devices like its smart speaker, Google Home. Specifically, consumers will now be able to take advantage of Walmart’s “Easy Reorder” feature through an integration with Google’s shopping service, Google Express. This will allow consumers to shop from hundreds of thousands of Walmart products just by speaking, the companies explain.

Related to this, Google Express is also today ditching its membership fees, and now promises free delivery across its retailers in one to three days, as long as customer orders are above each store’s minimums.

This is a significant change for Google Express, which before charged customers $10 per month or $95 per year for a membership. The delivery service currently provides access to a number of big-name retailers, including Target, Costco, Kohl’s, Bed Bath & Beyond, PetSmart, Staples, Toys R Us, Walgreens, and many others across a variety of verticals like apparel, home goods, hardware, health and personal care, sporting goods, and beauty.

Google believes its fees were limiting adoption and were particularly cumbersome when it came to enabling voice shopping.

“The membership was getting in the way in terms of the amount of friction in the experience,” Brian Elliott, GM at Google Express, tells TechCrunch. “If you’re on a mobile device, it’s easy enough to explain you can either pay $4.99 to get this stuff delivered, or you can buy a membership.”

“Even then, you’re putting some degree of friction in front of the user,” he admits. “And it gets really hard to figure out how you’re going to tell somebody in a voice-based experience the difference between a membership and a non-membership,” Elliott says.

The company declines to say how many people have shopped using Google Express, or how many sales have run through the platform.

Prior to today, Walmart was not participating in Google Express at all, as the retailer is capable of handling its own e-commerce orders. It even this year launched its own 2-day shipping program, which unlike Amazon Prime, is free, provided the order is $35 or more.

However, Google Assistant integration means Walmart can leverage a new e-commerce platform it doesn’t have access to otherwise: voice computing.

Some analysts believe voice could be a major driver of future retail. For instance, RBC Capital Markets said Alexa could become a $10 billion business by 2020, thanks to its ability to power voice-driven shopping, in addition to other platform revenues.

Assuming that’s true, Walmart needs to get its skin in the game, too.

And the only other major player in town besides Amazon is Google Home. (Apple’s HomePod has yet to ship, and as of yet, there doesn’t seem to be a plan for voice-powered, third-party apps. Microsoft’s Cortana-powered speakers, meanwhile, are barely a blip.)

“It’s still really early days [for voice shopping]. However, we have watched the advancements in artificial intelligence over the previous two years and can extrapolate as to where it’s going,” says Marc Lore, Walmart’s head of e-commerce in the U.S, speaking about Walmart’s voice shopping ambitions.

“We do think that, in the future, voice will be orders of magnitude further along than it is today in understanding and responding to consumer needs. It’s going to be a powerful mechanism to enhance the shopping experience,” he adds.

Walmart is not the only retailer that can be shopped by voice on Google Home – Google Express announced its integration with Google Home back in February.

But by tying into Walmart’s new Easy Reorder feature, regular Walmart shoppers will more easily be able to place spoken orders for products. That’s because Easy Reorder understands your personal preferences based on your prior Walmart.com and in-store purchases. It knows the brand you use, and the size you want; it knows when you ordered last, and how often.

To buy again, you don’t have to use a specific phrase beyond, “OK, Google.” Then, anything like “order peanut butter” or “reorder peanut butter” or “buy peanut butter” or “buy peanut from Walmart” will do.

If the item is over $35 – Walmart’s minimum for free shipping – Google will ask if you’d like it delivered in two days. If it’s under that threshold, it’s added to your Walmart cart, accessible in both the Google Home companion app and Google Express app. When your cart fills above the $35 minimum, you’ll be prodded to complete the checkout.

While the initial integration is focused on Easy Reorder, Walmart is characterizing this as a partnership with Google because it has broader plans to work with the company on voice shopping in the future.

Next year, it will add support for buying groceries via voice, which you can then pick up at the store already bagged and ready, or have delivered, depending on availability of those checkout options. Lore also sees the potential for the system to get smarter in time, as it learns more about customers’ and their preferences.

Above: Easy Reorder, as it works through Walmart’s own mobile application

“As voice gets more mature, it will require a deep personalization, and the product recommendation will lend itself to one best answer,” he says. “I think we have a long way to go there, but I’m excited about the possibilities.”

Walmart’s integration with Google Express and Google Home will launch in late September.

Google Home’s smart speaker is the only way to voice shop Walmart at launch. But Elliott tells TechCrunch the plan is to roll it out to Google Assistant and voice interactions across other devices in time.

However, without a similar voice app for Amazon’s Alexa, Walmart could be missing out on a sizable slice of the voice computing market, given Amazon’s lead. Amazon is forecast to have 70 percent of the voice-enabled speaker market this year. By 2020, it’s projected that there will be 128 million Alexa devices installed.

We asked Lore, then, if Walmart would ever be shoppable from Alexa. He answered simply: “No.”

0 notes