The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
Its easy to write about what the government or other people should do with our/their money. It's harder to come up with a course of action that I can undertake on my own that possibly, somehow could make a difference. My first inclination is always to try to look "for the next big thing". But the next big thing is just that, next. Its not now. Its Venture Capital. Its not self funding, renewal capital.
Rather than trying to be a Venture Capitalist, I was looking for an idea that hopefully could inspire people to create businesses that could quickly become self funding. Businesses that just needed a jump start to get the ball rolling and create jobs. Im a big believer that entrepreneurs will lead us out of this mess. I just needed a way to help.
So here it is. Some people will love it, some will hate it. It is what it is.
You must post your business plan here on my blog where I expect other people can and will comment on it. I also expect that other people will steal the idea and use it elsewhere. That is the idea. Call this an open source funding environment.
If its a good idea and worth funding, we want it replicated elsewhere. The idea is not just to help you, but to figure out how to help the economy through hard work and ingenuity. If you come up with the idea and get funding, you have a head start. If you execute better than others, you could possibly make money at it. As you will see from the rules below, these are going to be businesses that are mostly driven by sweat equity.
I will invest money in businesses presented here on this blog. No minimum, no maximum, but a very specific set of rules. Here they are:
1. It can be an existing business or a start up.
2. It can not be a business that generates any revenue from advertising. Why ? Because I want this to be a business where you sell something and get paid for it. Thats the only way to get and stay profitable in such a short period of time.
3. It MUST BE CASH FLOW BREAK EVEN within 60 days
4. It must be profitable within 90 days.
5. Funding will be on a monthly basis. If you dont make your numbers, the funding stops
6. You must demonstrate as part of your plan that you sell your product or service for more than what it costs you to produce, fully encumbered
7. Everyone must work. The organization is completely flat. There are no employees reporting to managers. There is the founder/owners and everyone else
8. You must post your business plan here, or you can post it on slideshare.com , scribd.com or google docs, all completely public for anyone to see and/or download
9. I make no promises that if your business is profitable, that I will invest more money. Once you get the initial funding you are on your own
10. I will make no promises that I will be available to offer help. If I want to , I will. If not, I wont.
11. If you do get money, it goes into a bank that I specify, and I have the ability to watch the funds flow and the opportunity to require that I cosign any outflows.
12. In your business plan , make sure to specify how much equity I will receive or how I will get a return on my money.
13. No mult-level marketing programs (added 2/10/09 1pm)
Im sure I will come up with more rules as I see what comes along, if anything.
As I find businesses I like, I will use the email address you provide before you post to get in contact with you. There will be a standard agreement, you can take it or leave it. Once I have done the standard agreement, I will post it here for all to see. This will definitely be a work in progress. Maybe it leads to great things, maybe it leads to nothing. We will find out. Im not going to claim a minimum or maximum amount or total I will invest. Im not promising I will definitely invest anything. If nothing comes along that I think is viable, thats the way it goes.
Hopefully I will invest in quite a few businesses that will lead to something more
NBA All Stars by the Numbers
We have developed and enhanced a player and lineup evaluation system. We have been working on this for the last 8 years. Its far from perfect, and its greatest value is that over a period of years we have been able to identify trends to help us identify up and coming, starring and declining players. It also helps us understand what combinations of players work well together, and which dont.
To give you a basic understanding of the system, at its most basic its a plus minus system. Then we adjust it to take into account who the opponent is, is it home or away, are you playing against the other teams good lineup or bad lineup, what the score and game clock are (scoring the game winner is worth more than the 1st basket of the game. Scoring when up by 30 is worth nothing). If the team scores or gets a stop when the game is on the line, then your impact percentage goes up. We reward for getting the job done when it matters.
We track as you can see below by last games, and also track the variance. In other words, average is pretty much meaningless. You can score plus 20 one day, zero the next, but are you a 10 level
player ? We track the variance of the players performance. THe lower the variance, the more consistent the player on offense or defense.
One more point, these numbers don't reflect necessarily the best players in the league, but what they do reflect is the players that are being best put in a position to succeed and are delivering.
When their teams have a need, they deliver. Thats why some names are not the biggest names. its also a reflection of their coaches. Some coaches don't necessarily use their players in the
best lineups or matchups, which negatively impacts their ability to perform. Others are consistently good at it.
This is purely quantitative, nothing more or less. But Im sure it will lead to lots of discussion ******* POINTS= OFFENSE-DEFENSE IMPACT% MINUTES Z-SCORE 1 CLE LeBron James 24.16 17.18 -6.98 62.49% 1807.01 3.2034 CLE last 3/ 48 17.73 13.28 -4.45 33.24% 120.40 CLE last 5/ 48 19.78 14.07 -5.71 35.22% 195.22 CLE last 8/ 48 22.44 19.96 -2.48 62.95% 314.52 CLE window 6/ 6 tm 18.11 15.06 -3.05 38.41% 232.74 CLE varies 48/ 48 ( 13.98)( 9.61)( 11.59)( 33.61%) 1807.01 2 DAL Jason Kidd 17.12 11.69 -5.44 64.94% 1761.98 2.7861 DAL last 3/ 50 5.16 7.90 2.74 54.54% 102.94 DAL last 5/ 50 23.37 15.72 -7.65 84.60% 173.52 DAL last 8/ 50 23.35 17.62 -5.73 72.93% 273.98 DAL window 7/ 7 tm 21.01 16.33 -4.68 71.25% 240.58 DAL varies 50/ 50 ( 18.86)( 11.26)( 13.35)( 44.76%) 1761.98 3 MIA Dwyane Wade 17.56 21.34 3.78 58.90% 1867.31 2.7435 MIA last 3/ 49 20.80 28.17 7.36 61.64% 123.53 MIA last 5/ 49 8.99 20.71 11.72 41.22% 195.08 MIA last 8/ 49 14.03 21.13 7.09 51.66% 294.94 MIA window 7/ 7 tm 12.34 20.23 7.89 47.16% 258.72 MIA varies 49/ 49 ( 14.63)( 10.87)( 11.52)( 41.38%) 1867.31 4 NOH Chris Paul 21.12 7.93 -13.19 51.91% 1685.00 2.7183 NOH last 3/ 45 17.54 4.67 -12.86 16.65% 97.48 NOH last 5/ 45 20.71 5.81 -14.90 30.71% 177.90 NOH last 8/ 45 19.80 6.77 -13.02 39.15% 292.83 NOH window 5/ 7 tm 20.71 5.81 -14.90 30.71% 177.90 NOH varies 45/ 45 ( 14.11)( 11.01)( 9.39)( 44.43%) 1685.00 5 PHI Andre Iguodala 17.19 6.63 -10.56 56.90% 1896.28 2.6702 PHI last 3/ 49 11.57 0.78 -10.79 17.94% 121.20 PHI last 5/ 49 10.46 -1.02 -11.49 11.77% 201.57 PHI last 8/ 49 12.05 2.09 -9.97 33.83% 318.73 PHI window 7/ 7 tm 9.75 -0.63 -10.38 21.10% 277.32 PHI varies 49/ 49 ( 12.19)( 9.86)( 8.69)( 53.51%) 1896.28 6 BOS Ray Allen 16.35 8.67 -7.68 43.50% 1897.46 2.2523 BOS last 3/ 52 14.36 7.84 -6.52 45.06% 124.18 BOS last 5/ 52 15.95 9.57 -6.37 54.50% 196.90 BOS last 8/ 52 20.13 13.09 -7.03 64.21% 300.94 BOS window 7/ 7 tm 18.81 14.46 -4.35 61.31% 263.15 BOS varies 52/ 52 ( 16.46)( 12.76)( 10.89)( 48.47%) 1897.46 7 ORL Rashard Lewis 12.91 6.86 -6.05 36.79% 1807.13 1.8585 ORL last 3/ 49 6.35 2.39 -3.96 16.82% 107.88 ORL last 5/ 49 14.77 6.01 -8.76 37.84% 188.08 ORL last 8/ 49 13.99 5.39 -8.60 29.24% 296.12 ORL window 6/ 6 tm 19.24 9.51 -9.73 41.18% 221.53 ORL varies 49/ 49 ( 14.65)( 13.63)( 8.43)( 46.65%) 1807.13 8 CHA Emeka Okafor 10.37 -0.14 -10.50 40.37% 1679.99 1.7337 CHA last 3/ 49 -7.12 -5.99 1.13 -12.95% 91.05 CHA last 5/ 49 7.75 -0.68 -8.44 38.49% 166.86 CHA last 8/ 49 13.98 1.66 -12.33 44.26% 253.02 CHA window 6/ 6 tm 9.59 -0.65 -10.24 41.10% 198.14 CHA varies 49/ 49 ( 15.66)( 11.01)( 11.83)( 48.23%) 1679.99 9 MIN Randy Foye 9.09 9.93 0.84 43.24% 1768.34 1.6464 MIN last 3/ 49 6.34 5.95 -0.39 52.70% 128.74 MIN last 5/ 49 3.43 10.77 7.35 34.21% 201.94 MIN last 8/ 49 4.37 6.20 1.83 33.23% 325.41 MIN window 8/ 8 tm 4.37 6.20 1.83 33.23% 325.41 MIN varies 49/ 49 ( 12.65)( 11.81)( 12.67)( 45.62%) 1768.34 10 HOU Yao Ming 9.64 -0.18 -9.83 34.83% 1579.31 1.5627 HOU last 3/ 48 7.81 7.42 -0.39 33.89% 99.06 HOU last 5/ 48 7.42 5.80 -1.62 25.29% 167.78 HOU last 8/ 48 8.26 5.11 -3.15 31.07% 245.35 HOU window 5/ 7 tm 7.42 5.80 -1.62 25.29% 167.78 HOU varies 48/ 48 ( 13.21)( 11.94)( 10.35)( 48.19%) 1579.31 ******* POINTS= OFFENSE-DEFENSE IMPACT% MINUTES Z-SCORE 11 ATL Joe Johnson 8.69 3.09 -5.59 37.43% 1917.51 1.5229 ATL last 3/ 48 3.67 4.44 0.77 26.02% 121.73 ATL last 5/ 48 -1.44 0.51 1.95 9.43% 205.94 ATL last 8/ 48 2.25 2.08 -0.17 15.91% 324.04 ATL window 6/ 8 tm -1.95 -0.15 1.81 6.23% 249.22 ATL varies 48/ 48 ( 13.21)( 9.57)( 12.38)( 38.42%) 1917.51 12 BOS Kevin Garnett 9.43 3.16 -6.27 32.43% 1594.00 1.4937 BOS last 5/ 49 12.52 7.36 -5.16 49.46% 156.75 BOS last 8/ 49 17.92 4.95 -12.97 53.54% 250.13 BOS window 5/ 7 tm 12.52 7.36 -5.16 49.46% 156.75 BOS varies 49/ 49 ( 18.27)( 13.57)( 12.38)( 50.83%) 1594.00 13 DEN Nene 10.79 2.87 -7.92 27.47% 1642.84 1.4643 DEN last 3/ 50 8.22 7.28 -0.94 49.03% 89.46 DEN last 5/ 50 11.18 9.19 -1.99 39.02% 156.01 DEN last 8/ 50 12.80 6.92 -5.88 32.15% 246.48 DEN window 8/ 8 tm 12.80 6.92 -5.88 32.15% 246.48 DEN varies 50/ 50 ( 16.25)( 14.16)( 10.14)( 52.28%) 1642.84 14 DET Rasheed Wallace 8.63 2.58 -6.05 33.16% 1481.02 1.4407 DET last 3/ 44 15.98 9.32 -6.65 65.70% 124.29 DET last 5/ 44 13.37 4.73 -8.64 66.60% 201.85 DET last 8/ 44 9.38 4.49 -4.89 47.81% 292.05 DET window 6/ 6 tm 12.45 5.93 -6.52 56.45% 240.59 DET varies 44/ 44 ( 15.85)( 11.22)( 11.86)( 54.42%) 1481.02 15 LAL Kobe Bryant 9.19 8.50 -0.70 27.97% 1793.17 1.3706 LAL last 3/ 49 14.01 16.74 2.73 63.87% 119.44 LAL last 5/ 49 12.59 19.61 7.02 49.08% 189.05 LAL last 8/ 49 12.41 15.76 3.35 42.00% 294.68 LAL window 7/ 7 tm 10.59 14.99 4.39 43.58% 266.58 LAL varies 49/ 49 ( 13.82)( 10.12)( 12.01)( 47.40%) 1793.17 16 UTA Andrei Kirilenko 12.17 6.78 -5.39 21.92% 1139.46 1.3604 UTA last 3/ 38 11.53 13.86 2.33 19.61% 75.18 UTA last 5/ 38 9.32 14.02 4.70 9.43% 156.50 UTA last 8/ 38 14.04 16.55 2.51 15.45% 243.33 UTA window 0/ 7 tm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00% 0.00 UTA varies 38/ 38 ( 18.17)( 11.89)( 13.66)( 56.91%) 1139.46 17 PHO Grant Hill 8.33 3.63 -4.70 30.18% 1382.00 1.3534 PHO last 3/ 48 19.33 14.43 -4.90 11.05% 89.98 PHO last 5/ 48 8.57 11.90 3.33 3.77% 166.17 PHO last 8/ 48 5.08 8.13 3.04 6.70% 236.57 PHO window 7/ 7 tm 9.89 11.36 1.47 12.46% 210.07 PHO varies 48/ 48 ( 21.14)( 14.26)( 14.93)( 54.56%) 1382.00 18 UTA Paul Millsap 11.20 3.62 -7.58 22.82% 1444.24 1.3473 UTA last 3/ 45 24.72 8.32 -16.40 41.92% 88.94 UTA last 5/ 45 18.68 10.25 -8.44 27.36% 158.35 UTA last 8/ 45 7.85 4.91 -2.95 1.34% 267.38 UTA window 7/ 7 tm 9.85 5.53 -4.32 9.80% 226.25 UTA varies 45/ 45 ( 17.56)( 10.11)( 13.49)( 46.96%) 1444.24 19 NJN Jarvis Hayes 8.04 -0.86 -8.90 29.31% 1164.38 1.3109 NJN last 3/ 46 23.51 -1.09 -24.59 28.15% 78.13 NJN last 5/ 46 16.82 -6.82 -23.64 48.06% 131.01 NJN last 8/ 46 13.98 -6.05 -20.03 23.98% 194.42 NJN window 7/ 7 tm 11.23 -8.71 -19.94 14.09% 172.93 NJN varies 46/ 46 ( 19.24)( 14.35)( 14.12)( 59.98%) 1164.38 20 POR LaMarcus Aldridge 7.69 3.77 -3.92 30.72% 1789.65 1.3095 POR last 3/ 49 -0.04 -1.68 -1.64 19.85% 123.20 POR last 5/ 49 7.81 2.71 -5.10 30.56% 192.67 POR last 8/ 49 4.06 1.89 -2.18 23.90% 305.24 POR window 6/ 6 tm 7.45 2.81 -4.63 35.02% 226.91 POR varies 49/ 49 ( 15.23)( 13.36)( 8.97)( 50.43%) 1789.65 ******* POINTS= OFFENSE-DEFENSE IMPACT% MINUTES Z-SCORE 21 UTA Mehmet Okur 6.72 3.48 -3.24 35.80% 1491.46 1.3032 UTA last 3/ 43 22.27 9.73 -12.54 69.04% 104.35 UTA last 5/ 43 14.79 9.82 -4.97 49.40% 173.36 UTA last 8/ 43 7.97 5.26 -2.71 32.81% 272.60 UTA window 7/ 7 tm 8.89 5.80 -3.09 37.37% 250.76 UTA varies 43/ 43 ( 14.34)( 10.51)( 10.17)( 43.33%) 1491.46 22 MIN Sebastian Telfair 5.65 1.78 -3.87 46.12% 1126.73 1.2886 MIN last 3/ 44 5.53 -0.43 -5.96 55.48% 92.25 MIN last 5/ 44 4.88 6.03 1.15 44.59% 160.05 MIN last 8/ 44 4.11 1.89 -2.22 49.30% 254.67 MIN window 8/ 8 tm 4.11 1.89 -2.22 49.30% 254.67 MIN varies 44/ 44 ( 15.03)( 14.42)( 14.56)( 41.52%) 1126.73 23 DAL Dirk Nowitzki 7.04 7.08 0.04 30.27% 1836.86 1.2430 DAL last 3/ 49 4.89 2.60 -2.29 36.74% 115.33 DAL last 5/ 49 16.08 7.51 -8.57 56.35% 189.51 DAL last 8/ 49 14.55 10.92 -3.63 44.59% 291.47 DAL window 7/ 7 tm 12.94 9.48 -3.45 43.81% 254.69 DAL varies 49/ 49 ( 18.02)( 10.46)( 13.44)( 47.24%) 1836.86 24 PHO Steve Nash 11.71 14.90 3.19 18.33% 1497.80 1.2248 PHO last 3/ 44 7.52 21.05 13.53 -4.42% 93.21 PHO last 5/ 44 3.44 19.26 15.82 -12.94% 173.73 PHO last 8/ 44 4.17 15.48 11.31 1.84% 263.71 PHO window 7/ 7 tm 8.98 18.86 9.89 8.29% 242.28 PHO varies 44/ 44 ( 17.71)( 12.53)( 12.46)( 57.52%) 1497.80 25 TOR Chris Bosh 10.15 7.38 -2.77 19.85% 1948.03 1.2039 TOR last 3/ 51 -0.33 4.72 5.04 6.45% 97.50 TOR last 5/ 51 -3.84 2.34 6.18 4.43% 172.91 TOR last 8/ 51 5.99 6.86 0.87 20.57% 286.96 TOR window 6/ 8 tm 0.70 3.85 3.15 14.38% 210.41 TOR varies 51/ 51 ( 15.42)( 10.30)( 12.11)( 49.95%) 1948.03 26 LAL Lamar Odom 8.25 4.25 -4.01 22.85% 1254.11 1.1732 LAL last 3/ 46 11.66 10.50 -1.16 65.37% 106.50 LAL last 5/ 46 9.70 11.30 1.61 52.25% 159.61 LAL last 8/ 46 5.18 5.94 0.76 15.76% 242.97 LAL window 7/ 7 tm 3.36 3.99 0.63 16.49% 220.27 LAL varies 46/ 46 ( 20.55)( 15.10)( 13.85)( 59.77%) 1254.11 27 CHI Ben Gordon 6.83 7.33 0.50 27.49% 1836.72 1.1702 CHI last 3/ 51 3.17 15.05 11.88 12.35% 104.44 CHI last 5/ 51 9.82 15.52 5.71 33.15% 175.44 CHI last 8/ 51 6.75 10.05 3.30 18.38% 281.08 CHI window 7/ 7 tm 9.66 10.82 1.16 26.96% 249.30 CHI varies 51/ 51 ( 14.18)( 10.62)( 12.34)( 45.11%) 1836.72 28 PHI Thaddeus Young 6.68 2.44 -4.24 28.05% 1662.23 1.1680 PHI last 3/ 49 14.82 5.86 -8.96 29.69% 105.76 PHI last 5/ 49 5.90 -1.58 -7.48 0.21% 189.84 PHI last 8/ 49 7.16 1.40 -5.76 21.08% 296.87 PHI window 7/ 7 tm 7.49 -0.44 -7.93 18.03% 258.09 PHI varies 49/ 49 ( 14.84)( 11.93)( 9.73)( 56.64%) 1662.23 29 SAS Matt Bonner 9.88 4.38 -5.51 16.08% 1065.79 1.0762 SAS last 3/ 47 12.41 9.54 -2.88 24.40% 75.24 SAS last 5/ 47 14.13 9.21 -4.92 35.69% 133.79 SAS last 8/ 47 8.89 2.57 -6.32 23.54% 200.32 SAS window 6/ 6 tm 7.80 4.19 -3.61 20.91% 155.16 SAS varies 47/ 47 ( 22.01)( 16.66)( 15.12)( 60.72%) 1065.79 30 GSW Andris Biedrins 4.42 1.19 -3.23 35.21% 1548.46 1.0627 GSW last 3/ 50 20.95 22.70 1.75 86.50% 67.43 GSW last 5/ 50 15.08 9.25 -5.83 68.29% 115.38 GSW last 8/ 50 7.95 4.14 -3.80 52.27% 201.71 GSW window 7/ 7 tm 9.09 4.08 -5.01 51.50% 166.84 GSW varies 50/ 50 ( 14.19)( 12.77)( 11.53)( 50.93%) 1548.46
If It's Not Broke, Doesn't Mean It's Optimal. Even in the NBA
Probably one of the most annoying things I have to deal with in business is that people never question the status quo. It doesn't matter what business it is. I doesn't even matter if its something that applies to how I do things, that I have become set in my ways on. It is rare when people just ask questions or apply some critical analysis to the things right in front of them.
The NBA is the perfect example. So many things are the way they are, because thats the way they always have been. I guess it was the old adage, "if it's not broke, don't not fix it". But not being broken, doesn't mean its optimal. Yet, just the smallest bit of critical analysis can lead to changes. Fortunately, the NBA is evolving into an organization that will change. There is a new management style that has evolved over the past few years, which has lead to valid changes initiated by me and others which I think have benefited the league and our fans.
Here are a couple examples of things that used to be "conventional wisdom" in the NBA rule book that to the NBA's credit, when I brought it to their attention, were changed quickly and easily
1. Clear Path Foul
It used to be that when there was a clear path foul, (a defensive player grabs a player in front of him thereby preventing a probable layup) the offensive team was awarded 1 free throw and possession of the ball on the side. One day I decided to do some basic math. What was the percentage of a conversion on a layup. The play the defender was trying to prevent. What was the percent of conversion for a free throw from the average NBA player. And what was the conversion on the typical NBA possession.
I don't have the exact numbers here, but the following are pretty close: .70 for a free throw plus .45 x 2 points or .90 for a regular possesion, when added together gave a probably value to the posession of 1.6. The probability of making a break away layup with no one between you and the basket was 90pct or higher, x 2 points, or a possession value of 1.80. Which meant that under the rules, the advantage went to the defending team for grabbing the offensive player to stop a break away.
Once I offered this math to the league, the rule was changed to 2 free throws and the ball. Which gave the advantage to the offense with a value of .7 x 2 FTs plus .45 x 2pts for the possession or a total of 2.3 pts for the possession. The team that was fouled now received a significant benefit to reward their defensive effort.
Along the same lines of playing the advantage, for a long time the guideline for officials was to reward the offensive player if a defender created contact that didn't fully impact the offensive players Speed, Balance, Rythm and Quickness (SBRQ). In other words, give the guy with the ball the benefit of the doubt and don't take away their ability to score if the contact is marginal.
So a few years ago, Im watching the Pistons beat the Lakers in the Finals. I'm seeing Larry Brown's Pistons fully take advantage of the rules. It was impossible to stay in front of Kobe. He could get anywhere he wanted on the court. The Pistons knew it as well. So every time he tried to get to the basket, they would body up and bump him. The officials did just as they were supposed to. Since Kobe had the advantage on the defender, they didn't call a foul. However that little bump slowed Kobe down just enough that it gave Ben Wallace a split second more to on a pre rotation to the Paint, to be in a better position to defend the basket. Kobe still scored, but not quite as often as he may have otherwise.
At that point it dawned on me that the concept of playing the advantage in a one on one matchup had nothing to do with which TEAM gained the advantage. After all, its the team that scores the most points that wins. Detroit had a brilliant strategy and was playing it to perfection. After the finals, I sat down with the league and discussed with them the difference between player and team advantage. The discussion lead to changing the rules so that perimeter contact was called far more often
The point of the story is two fold:
1. To make it clear that not everything I do in the NBA results in or from a fine 
2. That sometimes even the most fully engrained rules or processes should have critical analysis applied to them. Just because something isn't broken doesn't mean a business can't benefit by looking to do something different. Strong organizations encourage the change and great employees always are looking to find ways to take even the basics and make them better
Hire Harry
Can I be the first to say that "Harry is the Man !" Putting the obvious reasons aside, I also want to be the first to suggest that we ask, and beg Harry to accept a newly created Presidential Financial Oversight Advisor position. Is there a better person to make sure that the oversight committees appointed to watch how the TARP and Stimulus is spent do their jobs ? Is there a person any of us would trust more to tell the politicians in Wall Street "How to tell if the oversight committees can "sit down in Fenway Park and find first base ?" To make sure there are appropriate levels of transparency ?
Keep your day jobs Harry. Do what you do. But give us taxpayers a ray of hope that our money won't all be wasted.
And when you get the oversight committees working, can we talk about balancing the budget ?
My Idea to Help the Economy and the Credit Crunch
Consumer savings are way up. Doesn't more savings mean more money in banks to lend ? Isn't that a good thing ?
Here is an idea for you. Create rewards for putting those savings in lending institutions, and reward the institutions for lending it out.
Make the interest earned on savings accounts and CDs tax free for individuals and corporations if the funds are deposited with lending institutions that lend out 100pct of those funds. Its a simple concept. If we are going to increase our savings, lets make sure that money is recycled into the economy and frees up credit.
Here is how I see it. As of June of '08, there were 7 TRILLION dollars in deposits held by lending institutions. If that number can grow by any percent, and be recycled into the economy through incentives, it completely changes the dynamics of an economic incentive plan. Plus, Im certain that banks would rather take in funds through deposits than by being required to pay 10pct for government bailout money.
More importantly, it works in a manner that we all understand. The only certainy about the proposed stimulus programs is their uncertainty and the queasy feelings we all will have as we watch the rules of unintended consequences create headlines on a weekly basis.
Breaking Down Bernie Madoff P2 & 3
Update: Sorry about the mis-postings here. Had an update malfunction. So some posts were updated out of order. To make it easier, Im just combining the 2 posts. Long, but less confusing.
There was a report in the WSJ today regarding possible Madoff accomplices. In it was a line, which if true, could make things interesting for investigators.
- " Across the hall was another room, where an old International Business Machines computer generated client statements, former employees say. Nearby was a small cluster of employees responsible for "stuffing envelopes" with client statements, according to a former employee. The IBM server operated independently from Madoff's other computer systems but was supported by tech staffers who also did work for the stock-trading group, according to former employees."
- If this server was operated seperately from the other Madoff corporate networks, I can tell you from years in IT the following are true:
- 1. There are untold IT techs who worked for the Madoff companies, or were outside contractors, who bitched every day about having to backup and service this computer seperately from all the others. They wouldnt be able to do remote backup or software installs and version control. They would have to physically go to the computer every day or support an admin who did. That would piss them off.
- 2. Just how old that IBM computer is will tell us volumes. If its more than a couple years old, those same techs are complaining about why its still around. If its more than a few years old, it also means they probably cant update any software running to the latest versions. Again, a red flag to the techs because it makes their job more difficult, particularly since Madoff cant plead poverty as an excuse for not upgrading
- If its a PC (the article references a computer and a server, which dont necessarily have to be PCs), is more than 5 years old and acting as a server, its running an old operating system. NT or who knows what. Heck if its more than 10 years old, it could be running OS/2 ! Regardless, those techs are not only mad for having to deal with all this ancient stuff, you know they are telling jokes about the entire situation
- 3. The age of the hardware will also tell you volumes about the origins of the software. Custom software running on an old computer means that it either can't be upgraded because its tailored to the system, or more likely, he no longer uses that same employees , contractors or vendors to maintain it, so he has to run what he already has. There is a chance there is a programmer out there who quit because they recognized something was wrong.
- 4. Madoff is a lot more technically astute than people seem to be giving him credit for. This is from a 1999 Marketwatch interview ""We are in the process of building a new trading platform, but it's not a ECN," Madoff told CBS.MarketWatch.com." Whatever software they developed to run that trading platform, he understood it and probably knew how to use it. Would it be a shock if the 1999 version of the software could run on that old IBM computer allowing him to create his own virtual market and spit out statements ? A self contained trading platform could probably handle this from A to Z ?
Maybe. Curiousity got the best of me. So I started doing some searching on the electronic trading platform Bernie built. They called it Primex. Its an electronic auction system for securities. According to media reports, it was the "brainchild of Bernie and Peter Madoff"
So I searched some more and saw this Feb 16th , 2000 press release: The basics of which are "SST's B4B FIX combines robust object-oriented architecture with push-based TCP/IP messaging to provide an extremely fast and stable platform for both FIX connectivity and message processing. B4B FIX can be combined with SST's B4B OMS(TM) in a seamlessly integrated order management system that generically integrates with B4B FIX to facilitate the straight through electronic trading process and improve the operational and connectivity efficiencies of its users.
"We are excited about satisfying Primex Trading's strict requirements for high performance and reliability," said Larry Gusto, President and CEO of Silicon Summit Technologies, Inc. "B4B FIX's reputation for best performance and high-quality electronic securities trading software is the key value proposition that we offer. With B4B FIX pre-installed on the server located at broker/dealers' premises, broker/dealers can take full advantage of the B4B FIX functionality for accessing the PRIMEX AUCTION SYSTEM."
Some I'm thinking I may have found the company that wrote the software Madoff used on his lonely IBM Computer. The obvious next step is to find out more about Silicon Summit. So I did a search. It's website is gone, but there are remnants of an old site with a company history that ends a week after the Primex deal. Maybe they got acquired, but I didnt find it. Of course in these situations, you use what limited information you have to fit the last hypothesis you made, which in my last post was that it was possible that the software company that wrote the software Madoff used for his fraud was no longer working on the code. Which would explain why he continued to use an old computer.
But wait, there's more. So I did a search on the address of the company and boom, up comes this nugget:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DESIST AND REFRAIN ORDER
The California Corporations Commissioner is of the opinion that Silicon Summit
Let me clear. This could all be a BIG BAG OF NOTHING and probably is. But you have to admit, its sometimes a long strange search trip we undertake when we are curious and have a search engine handy.
Tech & Misc Ramblings…
1. Youtube has become the defacto innovation killer in the video space. Unfortunately for the industry, if Youtube doesn't adopt it, it doesn't exist. Its MicroSoft Windows circa late 80's, early 90's all over again.
2. I just booted Firefox to the curb on my PC and replaced it with Chrome (Yes I see the irony of killing Youtube above and pushing Google Chrome). I got tired of Firefox slowing my computer to a crawl or freezing it completely. Chrome is fast. Of course its far from perfect. If it doesnt get support for RSS feeds very, VERY quickly I may be forced to reconsider IE and its new version
3. For all its faults, I am still hooked on my Sidekick. Nothing beats the keyboard. I have tried every other mobile out there and I can still type at least 2x as fast with far fewer mistakes on my trusty Sidekick
4. If the fact that the internet is not ever discussed as being integral, or even part of the solution to our current economic woes isn't proof that it has become nothing more than a valuable utility, I don't know what is.
5. NBA Live 09 is becoming a management tool in the NBA.
6. I bought and tried a Kindle, it didn't work the way I do. Gave it to my wife and she loves it.
7. Its sad, but every major tech magazine that I grew up on is gone PC Week, Byte and now PC Mag among many, many others. It used to be fun to go to the bookstore to see if there were any new magazines. At last week's CES the magazine racks were empty. Nothing besides the daily. Big time Bummer.
8. I've increased the number of magazine and newspaper subscriptions I get. Its a matter of principle. I want to see them survive. Should I go Nascar and get a jacket with the logos of their advertisers ? On the topic of newspapers. Once they all declare chapter 11, they can get their cost structures in place to support far lower readership levels. At that point, probably less than 5 years and working from a low revenue base, we will be talking about the renaisance of the newspaper business. It wont ever reach pre internet levels, but it will be considered a "new growth business".
Here are some samples Techmeme, Steelers, Youtube, Erin Burnett,
| |  | ||||||
| Big Buzz | 1 - 50 of 1,000 results for HDNET |
 Results RSS |
| Auto refresh off 1 minute 3 minutes 5 minutes |
| 4 h Affliction's Jay Hieron vs. Jason High fight to air on Friday's "Inside MMA" · … installment of "Inside MMA" on HDNet. The fight was originally slated … |
| 4 h Affliction's Jay Hieron vs. Jason High fight to air on Friday's … · … in its entirety on Friday's new installment of "Inside MMA" on HDNet. br … |
| 4 h HDNet to Broadcast 2009 College Basketball Invitational · Sixteen NCAA teams to compete LIVE on HDNet HDNet and The Gazelle … |
| 10 h BS With Honor #34 (Part 1) · … and fortunately, Brian remembers that we should talk about the HDNet deal. … |
| 11 h Free NWA TV · … just signed a TV deal with HDNet. Yay for an indie getting a TV deal. Boo … |
| 13 h HDNet.Fights.Sudden.Impact.HDTV.XviD-KYR · … HDNet Fights: Sudden Impact genre: MMA rel. date: 01/27/09 format … |
| 15 h La 1º fecha de TH publica para el 2009! · HDnet: Tokio Hotel live from Hollywood (The Avalon) - full concert … |
| 15 h More On ROH's TV Deal, D-Lo In ROH, ECW Arena · Details on Ring of Honor's new television show on HDNet .. Plus - D … |
| 15 h Major Backstage Update On ROH's New TV Deal Inside, More · … with cable network HDNet to air a new weekly 1-hour show. Ring of Honor's … |
| 15 h Get to Know Chad Corvin of the XFC · ] right now," said Prisco, whose XFC promotion airs nationwide on HDNet … |
| 6 m mattrix633: @lil_lana it was HDNET. I haven't seen it on since. I don't think their touring though |
· | 7 h vinod_c: Watched Davos coverage- Wen and Putin's Keynotes. Saw for first time Glengarry Glen Ross on HDNET. What movie! Alec Balwdwin's 10 minutes! · Reply View |
| 9 h candicemarie24: Watching Third Eye Blind concert on Hdnet channel. Matt DVRed it hehe good music! · Reply View |
| 10 h curtis_matt: Hdnet- high def concerts remind me of our church, how cool is that! Rockin to matchbox 20! · Reply View |
| 11 h afarnham: @michellegreer there is also the fact that he is heavily invested in the HDNET television network. His interests lay in tv survival · Reply View |
| 11 h storageio: @storageio On HDNet, Glenn Gary Glenn Ross - ABC, Coffee is for closers… · Reply View |
| 11 h timelliott: Watching the big lebowski on hdnet… What a great movie… Jeff was robbed of an oscar here… · Reply View |
| 12 h AGKnowles: Lebowski on hdnet movies is a tremendous find. · Reply View |
| 12 h shivvy: is watching "The Big Lebowski" for the millionth time on HDNet Movies. "He thinks the carpet pissers did this?" · Reply View |
| 12 h Pillionaire: @HDNet love dan rather reports, watch it whenever I see it on · Reply View |
| 4 h Sport news · Armata Ultra: HDNet to Broadcast 2009 College Basketball Invitational · View |
| 7 h davos - Twit · Robert Scoble: Watched Davos coverage- Wen and Putin's Keynotes. Saw for first time Glengarry Glen Ross on HDNET. What … · View |
| 22 h Wired@Home.com / Published … · David Ward: HDNet Fights signs up with Ring of Honor wrestling · View |
| 22 h Engadget HD · Bwana: HDNet Fights signs up with Ring of Honor wrestling · View |
| 1 d MMAjunkie.com Articles · Peter: HDNet Fights Video Vault: Jordan Radev vs. Rafael Rodriguez at M-1 · View |
| 2 d Bloody Elbow · (jeff)isageek: Florida's XFC Signs Broadcast Deal with HDNet · View |
| 2 d mma - Google News · Art Peterson: XFC announces multi-year television deal with HDNet - ifight365.com · View |
| 2 d EcuaLucha · Mauro: Ring of Honor y HDNet firman contrato · View |
| 2 d MMAjunkie.com Articles · Peter: Xtreme Fighting Championships inks multi-year broadcast deal with HDNet · View |
| 3 d Facebook · JT: Justin Watching OAR on HDNet. I like their show. Plus they don't wear girl pants. That got to count for … · View |
          |
| 1 h International play impacts MLS schedule · A league spokesman said discussions are ongoing for telecasts on HDNet, which has broadcast games the … |
| 3 h Soccer | Crew: Schmid's return to town won't come until October · Former broadcast partner HDNet might also pick up MLS games this season…. |
| 4 h Affliction's Jay Hieron vs. Jason High fight to air on Friday's … · 24 event's HDNet-televised preliminary card. However, … |
| 8 h MLS Unveils 2009 Regular Season Schedule · MLS is in discussions with HDNet to continue broadcasting games on the first all-high definition … |
| 9 h HDNet To Carry College Basketball Tourney · by David Goetzl, 6 hours ago HDNet has reached a deal to air a third college basketball … |
| 10 h Studios Acquire Titles at Sundance · Magnolia previously has participated in the "superrelease" phenomenon whereby films are released theatrically, online … |
| 10 h The HDNet Concert Series Checks Into 'Tokio Hotel' · WHAT: The HDNet Concert series presents "Tokio Hotel Live from Avalon … |
| 11 h The Hamilton Ave Journal 01.29.09: Volume 2 – Issue 71 · Meanwhile, ROH officially signed a deal HDNet. Although HDNet is not … |
| 12 h Bud Withers One more college basketball tournament? Why not? · The CBI announced a TV deal with HD Net to do 11 of its games, while the CollegeInsider…. |
| 17 h Steven Soderbergh, film revolutionary · … Experience," we're going to do a window of on-demand with a slightly different version before it opens … |
          |
The Great Internet Video Lie
Internet Video. Its the salvation for content creators everywhere. Its the end to dependence on the big bad meanies, the cable and satellite companies. Right ? Hell no. The concept that "over the top" video creates a valid business alternative for content creators is as misguided an internet business myth as there is.
For grins, lets say you want to start a business for which you want to stream, live or on demand, any video. Any quality. You want the ability to reach merely 10k simultaneous viewers. Not a big number. In fact , its a tiny number. Its certainly not competitive with any form of traditional TV, but its a starting point. So to stream 10k simultaneous streams, what are your choices ?
Can you just do it from a PC in your dorm room ? From your house on your cable or DSL line ? No. You will need an outside vendor in order to offer a mere 10k simultaneous streams. Which leads to the question of who can provide a service as simple as 10k streams ? Who can do it with any level of reliability ?
The natural response of course would be to say to use Youtube, right ? Except that their terms of service prohibit commercial applications. You can pimp your content and do ad shares, but you cant have control of your content and its presentation. Its branded Youtube. Its controlled by Youtube.
So what are your options ? You have a single option. You have to use a Content Delivery Network (CDN). CDNs specialize in delivering content that needs to scale to large numbers, and 10k simultaneous users, particularly if its sustained for any period of time, like a cable network would be, is considered a large number.
When Youtube did their big live event, they used a 3rd party CDN. Any large scale event streamed to thousands or hundreds of thousands of simultaneous users is going to require hiring and paying a CDN like Akamai, Limelight or one of just a few others that can offer scaled streaming.
There in lies the rub. There are only a few CDNs that can offer any level of scale for delivering video to an audience that is large by internet standards, but very small by cable or satellite standards. There is not a single CDN that can deliver 2 or more video streams concurrently to more than 1mm simultaneous viewers. Not one. Anywhere. There are probably 3, maybe 4, that on a perfect day might be able to deliver a single video stream to 500k simultaneous viewers.
On the flip side, there are at least 8 large cable and satellite video distributors that can deliver 100 or more video streams, concurrently, to a million or more simultaneous viewers.
The Great Internet Video Lie is that the internet opens distribution to compete with the evil gate keepers, cable and satellite. In reality, if you have a desire to deliver a large number of streams, and you want to compete with another internet video provider to offer a large number of streams, you are not in a very good position. You are at the mercy of 3 or 4 CDNs, the ultimate internet video gatekeepers
Let me put this another way. Lets say you have your "Worlds Greatest Concert" that you are sure can draw 500k simultaneous streams (on demand or live) . Also planning to stream a large event, lets say the first broadcast of Dark Knight 2, which the producers will stream live at the same time, and oh my goodness, the remaining Beatles decide to have their final reunion with a single live concert at the exact same time. 3 Mega events, each with an expected draw of 500k simultaneous users. Who has the greatest opportunity and the most leverage ?
Thats easy. Its the CDNs. You have so few choices of vendors that the CDNs can charge whatever they want to handle the event. And thats for one single event. You dont want to know about costs for 24×7 streaming for viewership levels of even small cable networks.
The internet is not an open video platform. Video distribution of any scale places you at the mercy of just a very few CDNs. You literally have to compete for timeslots for very large events. If you want an interesting excercise, call up a CDN and ask them how much it would cost to support an audience that is never smaller than 10k simultaneous viewers for a 1mbs stream, 24 hours a day, for 365 consecutive days. Then call up one of the satellite providers and ask how much they would charge you to deliver to 100pct of their customers, and then call up a cable company and ask the same question. Total up the cable and satellite numbers and compare them to the internet costs. You may be surprised to see which is cheaper.
If you have dreams of competing with traditional TV network viewing numbers using the internet, dream on. You cant afford it. You have been sucker punched by the Great Internet Lie.
Breaking Down Bernie Madoff
Im taking a flyer here, but if they were to put me on the case, the first people I would talk to are the software developers. Somewhere along the line there was a software program written or modified that allowed Madoff to enter the numbers he made up, who they were paying out cash to and would print the checks and statements. Its very unlikely that it was off the shelf software because it would be impossible for all the numbers to balance, or he would need to use suspense type of accounts that would raise red flags for even the smallest of accounting firms.
Maybe I have missed it, but I have yet to see an article written or any commentary about the software Madoff Investments used or read about any programmers that have come forward that worked for him. Someone had to outline the details of what they wanted the software to do, and in a scam of this size, could it be anyone but Madoff himself ? Someone had to take that information and either create or modify software to keep the whole mess running smoothly for him.
Find the programmers who wrote the software and you will find out how the whole thing worked.
Me & JR - The Charity Selection
Still waiting to hear from the Nuggets PR people. I appreciate all the suggestions for wonderful charities that people have posted in response to my last blog. However, in the event I dont hear back from the Nuggets, Im going to give the money to the Players Association Goals and Dreams Fund in the names of Todd Bertuzzi and Steve Moore.
Why in their names ? As a reminder of what could have happened, and that not every retaliation attempt misses. Tragedy can be one swing or one elbow away. There is no place for any action that could end someone's career or worse, in any sport
Blogs I Read
- Fallen Patriot Fund
- Great Mobile Links
- HDNet
- Magnolia Pictures
- Mavericks Wiki
- Michaels Insights
- techmeme
- The Ultimate Buzz Tracker
- TV Predictions
Most Commented On (7 days)
Recent Comments
- Rajan Vaish on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- Melvin M. Tercan on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan ! « Rajan's School of Thought ! on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- Colboy on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- First things first… :: Bill Tamminga Sales and Marketing on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- John Harvey on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- Kate on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- John Harvey on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
- John Harvey on The Mark Cuban Stimulus Plan - Open Source Funding
沒有留言:
張貼留言