The truth is, most people underestimate the importance of owning a great flashlight. And these days, in a world where terrorism, and natural disasters are becoming the norm, it’s more important than ever to have the right tactical gear.
This light’s incredible LED technology is used by the U.S. Navy Seals, the Coast Guard, Firemen, Policemen, U.S. Search and Rescue and now it’s been placed inside of an amazing Flashlight called the G700…
“In times like these, it’s more important than ever for Americans to be prepared for anything, and this flashlight is one of the best pieces of gear to have as it can be used in almost every situation, from self defense to finding your dog at night…” -Matt B. Tactical Flashlight Expert
With Over 20,000 Sold This Month, People Are Talking:
“I can’t believe they’re giving this light away for 75% off”
Sport and Sport team management is a special aspect of sports that deals with the overall management of a sports team. It entails the day to day activities and running of a team in liaison with team members, coaches, managers and other workers. These jobs and management aspect are done by individuals who have the task of scheduling and communicating regularly and demanded by the sport teams administration. These could be over-demanding and could have human errors and challenges.
Due to the entry of technology, there are applications that can effectively carry out these operations and management tasks, enter TeamSnap. TeamSnapis a cutting-edge sports team management application that works effectively and efficiently for team managers, coaches and organizers. It’s the no.1 best sports online management application that helps manage your sport teams.
With a superior and amazing interface, TeamSnap makes communication in sports between team members and managers/coaches quicker, easier and faster. It presents an overall simple and easy approach to team management. All team updates, database and communications are quickly delivered through TeamSnap.
An effective and special aspect of this is the availability of the TeamSnap app on IPhone, IPad and Android which an on the go application for management. With features as team programs, a team member’s data base, tracking payments and financials etc. you are guaranteed a team manager.
The TeamSnap application is availablehere and you can get started as soon as possible. It promises you the best and you will be glad that you signed up. There’s a free 21 day sign up with no need for credit card submit. A full version is available at a token fee and watch your sport team management get automated.
The holidays are a time of great fellowship, pretty lights and decorations, and of course …
Gifts. Oh so many gifts!
When you look around at your home during the holidays and you see all the seeming divergent items that help make your home festive for Christmas, have you noticed that there may be a single item that may contribute to the existence of all this festivity?
Think about if there was a certain element that might have not existed – would Christmas look the same in your home?
The Christmas Element?
Silicon is one of the most common and prevalent elements on Earth, and it is used in a number of different products, many of which can be found in our Christmas-adorned domicile.
Silicon, which is not very prevalent on its own but in combination with other elements (such as oxygen, carbon and hydrogen among the most common), does have a lot of versatility in manufacturing efforts. Silicon is called a metalloid, which is a hybrid between a metal and a non-metal. This means that silicon has some qualities of the one and some qualities of the other to where it cannot be placed into either category.
At room temperature, it looks like a metal in that it is solid. It is a decent semiconductor, which makes it great for solar panels and computer chips with its ability to conduct electricity. It is a semiconductor in that the flow of current can be controlled, and it does conduct electricity better as it gets heated (which is the opposite of a metal, by the way). Silicon, in the form of silica, can prevent moisture and even odors from affecting fragile electronics or clothing, and it can be used as a bonding agent in certain grout, mortar and even in some bricks and ceramics.
When you take a look at it, silicon has the properties to be at the center of all things Christmas.
Maybe you have a tree stand filled with sand to hold the Christmas tree in place. Maybe you want to package some electronics to send to faraway friends or relatives that need moisture to be kept away from the electronics. Maybe you have electronics in your own home (very few of us don’t!). Maybe you have garlands or wreaths or decorations and plug into outlets alongside your lights?
In many of these items, silicon is involved in some way or another. When you think about how much silicon is used in different ways, there may be reason to think that Christmas would look very different without it.
Where silicon can make the biggest influence at Christmas is in many of the gifts that are exchanged from under the tree. Many of the most popular gifts are electronic in nature – tablet computers, smartphones and even many toys for the children. Appliances, computer devices, televisions and many others use silicon chips to run and record memory to execute tasks through transistors. While a couple of alternatives to silicon have been developed and are in some commercial production, the disappearance of silicon would at the very least make electronics more expensive – which would certainly pinch many gift-giving budgets.
Maybe it is time to pay due respect to the versatile element of silicon and give it thanks for the festivity that makes up our holiday season.
Time for the annual karaoke party? (Seriously. I think people have those.) In the past, you had to rent or buy an expensive machine that probably drove your crooners nuts by being unpredictable and hard to use. Not anymore.
This little unit plays CDs but will also stream music from your smartphone. The little 3.5-inch screen scrolls the lyrics to keep singers on track; you can also connect it to the TV, to make those lyrics bigger. It will even let you tune the song to your vocal range, add back-up singers (in case you forget a line), and feed echo through the microphone to improve your sound. It comes with a microphone and collection of popular karaoke songs so you can get all Sinatra right out of the box.
The best part: It’s on super-sale right now at Electrohome.com: Normally $99, you can get it now for $70.
The ugly court case pitting a former Stanford Graduate School of Business professor against Stanford University and GSB Dean Garth Saloner has ensnared one of the world’s most prominent corporations. Stanford has dragged the mighty Apple – reluctantly – into the lawsuit by former professor Jim Phills, who alleges Saloner railroaded him out of the business school while sleeping with his wife, high-profile organizational behavior professor Deborah Gruenfeld.
The university’s latest hard-ball gambit in its costly battle against a former employee is bound to ignite fires of rage across academia, as the university brazenly and against established academic tradition asserts ownership over course materials that Phills, who now teaches at Apple’s in-house training facility, developed while working at Stanford.
“The claim represents a broad assault on the principle of academic freedom,” Phills claims in a statement to Poets&Quants. “Universities almost universally recognize faculty ownership of the fruits of their academic labors. Stanford’s attempt to appropriate a faculty member’s intellectual property in order to gain leverage in an employment dispute constitutes a profoundly chilling precedent — not only for professors at Stanford, but also for academics everywhere.”
‘STANFORD HOPES JUDGE WILL FORCE APPLE TO GIVE IT AN EX-PROF’S TEACHING MATERIALS
The university is in California Superior Court in San Jose seeking a judge’s order forcing Apple to give Stanford all Phills’ teaching materials from Apple University, the company’s training facility. Stanford does not make clear in its court filings exactly what it is laying claim to. But prominent University of Pennsylvania Wharton School marketing professor Peter Fader says that in general, university ownership of faculty work “only becomes an issue in medicine or engineering when a product is created in a university lab by a faculty member.
“When it’s just ideas, it is a night-and-day difference. A university can’t claim to own your ideas.”
Apple hired Phills in 2012 to teach at Apple University while he was on leave from the GSB, where he taught organizational behavior and had directed the school’s social innovation center. The tech giant has kept him aboard as a highly compensated faculty member, but now has been forced to take on some of his baggage.
STANFORD CLAIMS PHILLS IMPROPERLY ACCESSED UNIVERSITY PROPERTY
Stanford claims it needs the material in part to oppose Phills’ claim that he was harmed financially by his treatment at the GSB, but the demand is clearly aimed at the teaching materials themselves: “Stanford has reason to believe that Phills improperly accessed and saved Stanford property (including course information and documentation owned by Stanford) via its computers and computer network,” according to the Stanford filing. “When Phills failed to return the computers in their entirety at the conclusion of his employment, he may have kept documentation/electronic data which was rightfully Stanford’s property and used it in the creation of his Apple University course materials.”
Apple’s lawyers found Stanford’s demand mind-boggling, says Phills’ lawyer Andrew Pierce of Pierce & Shearer. “In fact, one of the lawyers said he’d never seen anyone do anything like this,” Pierce says. “This is an unusual thing, for (Stanford) to come after Apple for the materials. No one’s ever seen anything like that.”
The development strikes an especially discordant note given the close relationship between Stanford and Apple, he says. Pierce, however, was not surprised by the university’s move. “They’ve been telling me from the beginning three years ago that they’re going to find out whether Jim’s teaching the same courses,” he says. “I really think it’s more to harass him than anything else. They want Apple University to be upset with Jim.”
STANFORD ALREADY HAS SPENT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN LEGAL FEES
Stanford’s assertion of ownership over course material gains a profound element of irony when considered in light of the $1 million book advance Phills’ wife and GSB professor Gruenfeld recently earned for her forthcoming book “Acting With Power,” scheduled to be published in 2017. Gruenfeld, a GSB professor since 2000, teaches a single course, having developed it – starting around 2007,according to the GSB – on the foundation of two decades of research into power dynamics. The course’s title? Same as the book’s. Gruenfeld also sells “Acting With Power” DVDs for $95 through an online employee-training company. Many other business school professors spin course materials they’ve developed at their schools into lucrative speaking engagements, consulting gigs, and books, never having to share that income with their universities.
Phills has spun his aborted business school career into far more financially rewarding employment at Apple. Details of his income and finances have already been revealed through court filings. Working at the tech firm since 2012 has sent Phills’ income skyrocketing from less than $250,000 when he was at the GSB to $1.7 million last year. A great deal of his income, however, is going toward lawyers and court fees, as he simultaneously fights the lawsuit for wrongful dismissal and a bitter divorce battle with Gruenfeld, a board member of the women’s leadership group Lean In.
The divorce had cost Phills $260,000 in legal expenses by May 2015, according to the New York Times. Stanford, which inserted itself into the dispute in a largely unsuccessful attempt to prevent embarrassing public disclosures, has no doubt spent a hefty sum on that case. Total legal costs for Phills and Stanford in the lawsuit have not been disclosed in court (Phills told Vanity Fair earlier this year that his legal expenses were approaching $500,000, presumably including divorce-related billings), but the lawsuit has generated nearly three times the volume of legal filings as the divorce, and each side must have spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars on the fight – money that, for Stanford, could perhaps have been better spent on enhancing education for students.
SALONER AND STANFORD SUFFER SETBACKS IN LAWSUIT
Stanford and Saloner suffered a significant blow of late, when a judge threw out three claims made by the university and the business school dean in a “cross-complaint” they filed against Phills, seeking punitive, exemplary, and compensatory damages from him. The court found that Saloner’s claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress upon him by Phills did not hold up. Also the judge ruled invalid the two claims by Saloner and Stanford that Phills, who has admitted to using his wife’s passwords to access her email and social media accounts, broke U.S. and state law in accessing and saving the communications between Saloner and Gruenfeld. However, the ruling did leave open three allegations by Saloner: that Phills invaded his privacy by taking the communications; that Phills broke his employment contract; and, of relevance to Phills’ GSB teaching materials, that Phills “converted” – legalese for “stole” – Stanford property.
Saloner declined to comment on the ruling, on the advice of his lawyers, because of the ongoing litigation.
Phills calls the allegation that he stole university property by retaining teaching and research materials he’d created a “ludicrous and transparent attempt to intimidate me and drive up my legal costs.”
Stanford contends that a protective order it entered into with Apple in November protects the company from public disclosure of proprietary information.
As for Stanford’s claim that Phills may have misappropriated university course materials for use at Apple University, the issue of ownership of professors’ work is a charged one. “[I]t has been the prevailing academic practice to treat the faculty member as the copyright owner of works that are created independently and at the faculty member’s own initiative for traditional academic purposes,” says a statement by the American Association of University Professors. The association also reports that, “Despite this general practice and legal understanding, some colleges and universities still proclaim that even traditional academic works are ‘works made for hire’ (done by an employee as part of his/her job), and that the institution is the initial owner of copyright. The most common standard employed by universities for claiming ownership of faculty works is the ‘use of university resources’ or ‘significant or substantial use of university resources.’ However, since there is no tradition of applying this standard, the process of defining it will be one of uncertainty for both parties.”
IF A SCHOOL OWNS PROFS’ WORK, WHO CONTROLS THE CONTENT?
The professors’ association notes that the issue of ownership over instructional materials hasn’t been well tested in court, although rulings to date have favored professors as owners. The group stakes out a strong position on faculty ownership of the instructional materials they create: “Administration ownership of faculty scholarly works, lecture notes and teaching materials would profoundly contradict the practices of the academic community. Faculty scholarship as work-for-hire doesn’t fit, legally or policy-wise, into academic scholarship,” a statement from the group says. “Academic freedom requires that faculty be free to produce work reflecting their own views and theories – not those of administration or trustees. If all work belonged to the administration, then its content would also have to be controlled or at least accepted by the administration, which would vitiate any freedom of thought or inquiry.”
Stanford, in its university copyright policy, cites federal copyright law, but the policy’s list of works that can be copyrighted adds details not found in the U.S. Copyright Office definitions. Stanford’s policy expands the definition of “literary works” to include instructional material and tests, while adopting the rest of the definitions mostly verbatim. Under federal copyright law, ideas, concepts, and principles cannot be copyrighted.
A hearing on Stanford’s motion to force Apply to fork over the teaching materials is scheduled for Jan. 19. Apple did not respond by press time to a request for comment. Stanford said it would not comment because of the ongoing litigation.
MINNEAPOLIS, Minn. (December 17, 2015) —Despite a general consensus in the financial advice community that saving for retirement should trump paying for a child’s college education, nearly half of Americans disagree.
According to a recent poll from RBC Wealth Management-U.S. conducted by Ipsos, 49 percent of Americans place greater importance on helping their children pay for their education than they do on saving for their own retirement.
“As the cost of a college education in the U.S. continues to rise, parents will naturally want to help their kids get through school without accumulating a mountain of debt,” said John Taft, CEO of RBC Wealth Management in the U.S. “But with the gap between how much Americans have saved and what they will need to retire comfortably widening, we advise that people make funding their own retirement a priority. There are no grants, scholarships, or federally guaranteed loans to support them when they leave the workforce.”
Millennials (ages 18 to 34) are the most likely to prioritize financing their children’s education ahead of their own retirement. In fact, 60 percent of Americans in that age group said saving for their kids’ education was more important to them, compared with 43 percent of GenXers (ages 35 to 54) and only 28 percent of Baby Boomers (ages 55 and older).
“These results likely also reflect both philosophical and practical differences between generations,” said Malia Haskins of the Wealth Strategies Group at RBC Wealth Management-U.S. “For Millennials, retirement is much farther away than the more immediate challenge of putting kids through college, so it makes sense that they would put retirement on the back burner. Baby Boomers tend to believe that children should be self-motivated and should have some skin in the game when paying for college. GenXers, meanwhile, are somewhere in the middle. They want to pay for most if not all of college costs for their children, but they also may be nearing retirement and wanting to balance the two goals.”
While saving for retirement should be the priority, by planning and setting realistic goals it is possible for many families to meet both objectives, Haskins says. Planning is especially critical for families with lower household incomes. According to the RBC Wealth Management survey, Americans with household incomes under $50,000 were the most likely (57 percent) to place saving for a child’s education ahead of their own retirement needs.
“Sometimes families find they can fund their retirement and still contribute to a child’s education,” Haskins said. “By looking ahead a little bit, it’s easier to get an overall sense of whether their goals are realistic.”
These are some of the findings of an Ipsos poll conducted on behalf of RBC from October 6 to October 9, 2015. For the survey, a sample of n=2009 Americans was interviewed online via Ipsos’s American online panel, of which 569 are parents with children in the household. The precision of Ipsos online surveys is measured using a Bayesian credibility interval. In this case, with a sample of this size, the results are considered accurate to within ± 4.7 percentage points percentage points, 19 times out of 20, of what they would have been had all American parents been polled.
About RBC Wealth Management – U.S.
In the United States, RBC Wealth Management operates as a division of RBC Capital Markets, LLC. Founded in 1909, RBC Capital Markets, LLC. is a member of the New York Stock Exchange, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the Securities Investor Protection Corporation, and other major securities exchanges. RBC Wealth Management has $273 billion in total client assets with 1,900 financial advisors operating in 200 locations in 41 states
The Federal Reserve just enacted several changes to monetary policy, raising the benchmark Federal Funds target rate for the first time since 2006. Here are the key takeaways:
1. The target for the overnight interest rate has been raised, and the Fed will aim for 0.25% to 0.50% in the Federal Funds market, which is only traded by banks and the Federal GSEs. Some analysts predicted the Fed would simply target 0.50% and not a range. Accordingly, this move by the Fed gives it flexibility to enact its monetary policy goals where interest rates are still close to the critical zero-bound.
2. The Fed will maintain the size of its $4.4 trillion balance sheet, which is largely composed of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities that are guaranteed by the U.S. government. When the bonds mature, they will be rolled over, meaning the Fed will buy new bonds to replace them. This move was expected, but had the Fed decided to let the bonds “roll off” its balance sheet when they matured, this would have spooked bond markets and spiked rates further.
3. Interest on reserves was raised from 0.25% to 0.50%. This determines the amount of interest the Fed pays banks to keep their money sterilized (out of the economy) and stashed at the Fed. The move was largely expected and helps establish a floor on short-term interest rates. Therefore, banks are encouraged to keep as much money at the Fed as possible to earn a risk-free 0.50% interest rate.
4. The lower bound of 0.25% for the benchmark rate will be effected by the Fed selling its securities to a select group of primary dealers and buying them back the next day. The Fed will use $2 trillion of its bonds in these operations and will limit participation to $30 billion per dealer. The operation is called a reverse repo (or repurchase) and has an overnight maturity, meaning the Fed will be monitoring and conducting these operations every day to maintain the target interest rate range. By selling low and buying high, the Fed puts pressure on rates to achieve its target range.
5. The Fed will conduct longer term operations to drain money as well, using a so-called “term deposit facility” it set up in 2010. At the time, it believed a rate hike was imminent. As we now know, it took an additional five years to get to this point.
Feds: Maryland man got thousands from Islamic State
Can this tiny Bluetooth speaker replace your whole home stereo?
Another high-flying “unicorn” appears to be crashing to earth, in the latest sign that a correction is here for tech startups’ pie-in-the-sky valuations.
Quotes in the article
Hudson’s Bay Co
Pandora Media Inc
SoftBank Group Corp
Liberty Interactive Corp
Gilt Groupe, once among the hottest of New York startups with a $1.1 billion paper valuation, is in talks to sell itself to The Hudson’s Bay Co. for about one quarter of that pie-in-the-sky valuation, the Wall Street Journal reported Monday. The deal between the Toronto-based owner of Saks Fifth Avenue and the luxury goods flash sale retailer has not been finalized and talks could fall apart, the Journal noted.
That appears to no longer be the case, as Gilt has gradually lost much of its sheen. Earlier this year, Gilt raised $50 million in additional funding at what was believed to be a lower valuation, bringing its total venture funding to about $286 million. Some of its co-founders have gone on to found other ventures, and Gilt now has many flash-sale rivals such as Zulily, which was bought less than two years after its IPO by Liberty Interactive Corp.’s QVC for much less than it once traded for on Wall Street.
Billion Dollar Brows® – Get Free 2-Day Shipping Over $75!
DermStore.com/Free_Shipping dermstore.com is rated
20900+ followers on Twitter
AdGet Free 2-Day Shipping Over $75! Easy Returns, Use Code: Ship
With unicorns slowing starting to go public, the results are being closely watched by Silicon Valley, venture capital investors and mutual funds, which have been writing down some of their investments in startups. If Gilt’s sale to Hudson Bay goes through at the reported price, it will be yet another example of a wildly high private valuation and a cautionary tale of how they can change.
Everyone is clamoring over the Fed’s upcoming Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting set to take place December 16.
The big question on investors’ minds is: Will the Fed finally abandon its zero-interest rate policy and raise rates?
As you can see in the chart below, our current monetary policy is unprecedented. Abnormal. Insane even. No doubt, it will have its own chapter in the history books.
Rates have been stuck close to zero for five years and counting. Hence the term “zero-interest rate policy (ZIRP)” that comes from a mixture of slow economic growth and low interest rates.
It’s not Earth-shattering news that interest rates are in ultra-low territory. In many ways, rates are virtually nonexistent. That fact has stirred one of the greatest, most resilient bull markets in history.
But many investors are focused on a single idea. They ponder if the Federal Reserve will start to raise rates.
But we ask… Would an increase be so awful?
Most people think a hike is bad news. It will kill our sluggish economy, they argue. But if and when rates get lifted, these folks will miss out on a big opportunity to profit. You only have to look at the past to see why.
Why Smart Investors Should Be Praying for a Rate Hike
The chart below illustrates how the market reacted the last six times the Fed increased rates. To make this comparison as accurate as possible, we only looked at increases that came after a rate decrease.
As you can see, history shows that the anxiety surrounding higher rates – and its supposed negative impact on the markets – is unwarranted.
The numbers are broken out in the table below.
In the three-, six-, 12- and 18-month periods after a rate hike, the S&P has averaged positive returns. In fact, a year out, the index is showing more than a 12% gain. So while the initial market drop may seem unnerving, history has shown that it’s followed by a strong rebound.
Of course, the S&P 500 is a broad-based index. And as we dug deeper, our research revealed that not every sector and stock is a winner.
In fact, specific sectors historically get crushed by rate increases.
For example, energy tends to underperform following a rate increase. But add in $200 billion in high-yield energy debt, crashing crude prices and negative cash flow, and we see potential bankruptcies on the horizon. You don’t want to have any exposure to stocks in these industries after a rate hike.
At the same time, we discovered specific sectors and assets that completely crush it after a rate hike. Information technology (IT) is one sector that jumps an average 16.12%. The top performers do even better.
A lot of time and research went into discovering the winners and losers following these increases. So we put together a special report called “How to Survive and Thrive an Interest Rate Hike.”
Inside, you’ll discover what you need to do to protect your wealth immediately after a rate increase. And you’ll also learn how to book substantial profits in a rising rate environment.
Just enter your email address below to get instant access to this eye-opening report for free on the Investment U website:
The link to your free report will be sent to the email address you enter above, as well as continuing updates through a complimentary new subscription to Investment U newsletter, plus investment news, analysis, recommendations, flash alerts and special offers. You can unsubscribe at any time. We respect your privacy.