Not quite the whole story about the solid rockets. The issue with the o-rings is not the connection from the solid rockets to the main fuel tank.
The solid fule rocket is made up of 4 segments. There is an o-ring used to seal these segemnts together. This has always been a problem and remains a problem. The conection is a high stress point so problems are more evident there, but there are issues whereever there is an o-ring.
When the shuttle was first being designed NASA looked into casting the solid rockets as a single piece but that would have increased the weight too much.
It's not for the accounting. If a company spent $1,000,000 to acquire a copyright/patent it is held on the books for $1,000,000 less depreciation. This is called an asset on the balance sheet. It makes no difference if is a hit or a miss. The hit or miss part flows to revenue on the income sheet. Alas it is harder to value a idea than a hunk of gold or a piece of land.
why are they concentrating on how *profitable* the long tail is? As far as I see it, the long tail isn't about PROFIT, but about how much society wants the entertainment.
If not by profit, how would you judge what socity wants?
I have been to many state sponsored cultural events [opera, expermintal dance] which I have found beautiful. They are also half empty. A good example of the long tail and poorly allocated resources.
Which is why I am in favor of strong [but short] copyrights. Profit is the best [but not perfect] way of socity showing what they want- being pop bland or nich indi.
I will second ja1217.
Yes, there are computers out there that trade automatically and they make a ton of money.
Sometimes it is called picking up pennies in front of a steamroller.
Sometime it is called drive 60 mph down Wall Street chasing nickels before they go down the storm drain.
It costs a lot to hire the computer and brain power to make it work. And then somebody will develop something a tinny bit better they your money machine and you are no longer making those dollars.
It is a bit of a arms race.
As a capitalist I have to say that corporations are not always the answer. You just can't waive a magic wand.
So my question to you is this: Why would it be different if a Crown Corp ran it rather than the government?
There are some very specific motivations that drive a public corporation [maximizing profit, avoiding take overs, etc], that would be missing from a Crown Corp.
Public Corps tend to get bloated fast. Since they serve no single master they pander to all, in particular special interest groups.
Not saying it is a bad idea. The Government can proved many wonderful services, particular in areas of natural monopoly. All I am saying is that a Crown Corp is not a cure all.
Oddly enough, you can do that already. Itâ(TM)s called a non-recourse loan. If you want one all you have to do is go down to your bank and ask for it. Corporations do it all the time.
The reason why you donâ(TM)t hear about these loans is that the interest rates are higher and the down payment requirements are larger. It makes no sense for the average person it do.
And let us just remember two things.
First â" countries that have strong laws protecting the borrow tend to have higher interest rates. If the bank is going to assume extra risk for declining property values they will need to be compensated.
Second â" those evil sub prime loans are reasonable for dragging millions of people in poverty into middle class home ownership. Yeah, the past few years the party got out of hand. Changes are needed, but no reason why you need to toss the baby out with the dirty bathwater.
By the way, change does not mean doing random things â" like fingerprinting. I have worked in the securities industry compliance area and I have been fingerprinted. People committing securities fraud do not go to jail because of fingerprints. For a real life experience, not much help at all.
Sigh, these goes a little more humanity for nothing.
AAA Muni bonds have a lower coupon rate not because they are safer than AAA Corporate bonds, but because in the USA they are mostly tax free. [Your milliage may very depending on bond and the state that you live in].
You donâ(TM)t have to pay intrest on most muni bonds. So, if you are in the 50% tax bracket [because you are living in NYC and are paying Federal, State and City Income tax] a corporate bond yielding 4% and a muni bond yielding 2% put exactly the same amount of money in your pocket. So you donâ(TM)t care. Itâ(TM)s nothing about safty.
Not exactly, this is not above having a diversified portfolio. This is something different.
A typical CDO, Mortgage Back Pool, etc., is sliced into different âoeTranchesâ.
For example, a bond may be stuffed with 1,000 sub-prime home loans worth 250K each for a 250M bond. You cut the bond into two slices, a 200M âoeAâ tranch and a 50M âoeBâ tranch. You structure the default so all default loans hit the âoeBâ. If you structure the bond correctly, the chance that the âoeAâ tranch will get hit is low.
Most of these bonds that were issued prior to 2004 are working just fine.
Itâ(TM)s the bonds that were issued after this point that have gone wonkie. Mainly because everybody (lenders and borrows) were having too much fun drinking the KoolAid. Now we have the hangover.
That works for most ants - but not for the ants in the study.
Most ants lay down a chemical trail to follow home. But these are desert ants and they don't lay down that trail. So they must use something else, which - presto - is the entire point of the study. How do these desert ants get home without a chemical trail? Count your steps.
You can not short the stock of a new issue [unless you are a Market Maker] until 30 days after settlment [Trade Date + 3 trading days]. It is a Federal Reserve Rule
You can not collect the money upfront. Selling new issues of a stock [IPO] is a very strictly regulated process, both in terms of processes and timing.
And I am sorry for the people who did not get to trade their stocks the first day. That is sad. However, having worked in the back office of a securities industry, I can so see how this could happen. Getting the shares from the underwriter to an individual account must translate across at least 3 different technology platforms. None of them terribly well integrated or automated.
As for the little people who got stung - I have little sympathy for them. IPOs are not priced so initial investors have a sure thing. That is against the law. The company, with the help of the underwriters, must price them fairly. [Though they tend to be conservative and hence low].
The little guys are discouraged from doing IPOs because they complex and can become very messy very quickly. We are talking about a brand new company with no track record trying to guess how much it is worth. If you invest in the stock market, you know that you could lose it all. Doubly true for IPOs.
The US does have security laws on the books limiting foreign investment in telecommunication stocks. I don't know if Vonage is a telecommunications stock, so if this may or may not be the reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Not quite the whole story about the solid rockets. The issue with the o-rings is not the connection from the solid rockets to the main fuel tank. The solid fule rocket is made up of 4 segments. There is an o-ring used to seal these segemnts together. This has always been a problem and remains a problem. The conection is a high stress point so problems are more evident there, but there are issues whereever there is an o-ring. When the shuttle was first being designed NASA looked into casting the solid rockets as a single piece but that would have increased the weight too much.
It's not for the accounting. If a company spent $1,000,000 to acquire a copyright/patent it is held on the books for $1,000,000 less depreciation. This is called an asset on the balance sheet. It makes no difference if is a hit or a miss. The hit or miss part flows to revenue on the income sheet. Alas it is harder to value a idea than a hunk of gold or a piece of land.
why are they concentrating on how *profitable* the long tail is? As far as I see it, the long tail isn't about PROFIT, but about how much society wants the entertainment.
If not by profit, how would you judge what socity wants? I have been to many state sponsored cultural events [opera, expermintal dance] which I have found beautiful. They are also half empty. A good example of the long tail and poorly allocated resources. Which is why I am in favor of strong [but short] copyrights. Profit is the best [but not perfect] way of socity showing what they want- being pop bland or nich indi.
Well then - how am I going to sell my old piano then?
I will second ja1217. Yes, there are computers out there that trade automatically and they make a ton of money. Sometimes it is called picking up pennies in front of a steamroller. Sometime it is called drive 60 mph down Wall Street chasing nickels before they go down the storm drain. It costs a lot to hire the computer and brain power to make it work. And then somebody will develop something a tinny bit better they your money machine and you are no longer making those dollars. It is a bit of a arms race.
As a capitalist I have to say that corporations are not always the answer. You just can't waive a magic wand. So my question to you is this: Why would it be different if a Crown Corp ran it rather than the government? There are some very specific motivations that drive a public corporation [maximizing profit, avoiding take overs, etc], that would be missing from a Crown Corp. Public Corps tend to get bloated fast. Since they serve no single master they pander to all, in particular special interest groups. Not saying it is a bad idea. The Government can proved many wonderful services, particular in areas of natural monopoly. All I am saying is that a Crown Corp is not a cure all.
Umm, in America you normally have mortgage insurance unless you put 20% down.
Oddly enough, you can do that already. Itâ(TM)s called a non-recourse loan. If you want one all you have to do is go down to your bank and ask for it. Corporations do it all the time. The reason why you donâ(TM)t hear about these loans is that the interest rates are higher and the down payment requirements are larger. It makes no sense for the average person it do. And let us just remember two things. First â" countries that have strong laws protecting the borrow tend to have higher interest rates. If the bank is going to assume extra risk for declining property values they will need to be compensated. Second â" those evil sub prime loans are reasonable for dragging millions of people in poverty into middle class home ownership. Yeah, the past few years the party got out of hand. Changes are needed, but no reason why you need to toss the baby out with the dirty bathwater. By the way, change does not mean doing random things â" like fingerprinting. I have worked in the securities industry compliance area and I have been fingerprinted. People committing securities fraud do not go to jail because of fingerprints. For a real life experience, not much help at all. Sigh, these goes a little more humanity for nothing.
AAA Muni bonds have a lower coupon rate not because they are safer than AAA Corporate bonds, but because in the USA they are mostly tax free. [Your milliage may very depending on bond and the state that you live in]. You donâ(TM)t have to pay intrest on most muni bonds. So, if you are in the 50% tax bracket [because you are living in NYC and are paying Federal, State and City Income tax] a corporate bond yielding 4% and a muni bond yielding 2% put exactly the same amount of money in your pocket. So you donâ(TM)t care. Itâ(TM)s nothing about safty.
Not exactly, this is not above having a diversified portfolio. This is something different. A typical CDO, Mortgage Back Pool, etc., is sliced into different âoeTranchesâ. For example, a bond may be stuffed with 1,000 sub-prime home loans worth 250K each for a 250M bond. You cut the bond into two slices, a 200M âoeAâ tranch and a 50M âoeBâ tranch. You structure the default so all default loans hit the âoeBâ. If you structure the bond correctly, the chance that the âoeAâ tranch will get hit is low. Most of these bonds that were issued prior to 2004 are working just fine. Itâ(TM)s the bonds that were issued after this point that have gone wonkie. Mainly because everybody (lenders and borrows) were having too much fun drinking the KoolAid. Now we have the hangover.
That works for most ants - but not for the ants in the study. Most ants lay down a chemical trail to follow home. But these are desert ants and they don't lay down that trail. So they must use something else, which - presto - is the entire point of the study. How do these desert ants get home without a chemical trail? Count your steps.
You can not short the stock of a new issue [unless you are a Market Maker] until 30 days after settlment [Trade Date + 3 trading days]. It is a Federal Reserve Rule
You can not collect the money upfront. Selling new issues of a stock [IPO] is a very strictly regulated process, both in terms of processes and timing. And I am sorry for the people who did not get to trade their stocks the first day. That is sad. However, having worked in the back office of a securities industry, I can so see how this could happen. Getting the shares from the underwriter to an individual account must translate across at least 3 different technology platforms. None of them terribly well integrated or automated. As for the little people who got stung - I have little sympathy for them. IPOs are not priced so initial investors have a sure thing. That is against the law. The company, with the help of the underwriters, must price them fairly. [Though they tend to be conservative and hence low]. The little guys are discouraged from doing IPOs because they complex and can become very messy very quickly. We are talking about a brand new company with no track record trying to guess how much it is worth. If you invest in the stock market, you know that you could lose it all. Doubly true for IPOs.
The US does have security laws on the books limiting foreign investment in telecommunication stocks. I don't know if Vonage is a telecommunications stock, so if this may or may not be the reason.