The difference is, Google actually turns a net profit on big revenues. Uber's losses are larger than it's revenues (meaning they are burning 100% of revenue - AND still consuming additional investment funds). Google's value is inflated IMHO, but there is real value there. Uber's value is 100% speculative.
No, that's about the right amount of gross profit for a successful software platform. Microsoft tends to make around 60-70% gross margins, and they are predominantly a software company. So yeah - 70% gross margin sounds about right.
Thank goodness that Janet Reno ignored the advice of her own campaign task force head and didn't appoint an independent investigator into the fundings of the DNC and the Clinton re-election campaigns...
The middle east issues go back to Carter and beyond. Iraq was boosted to counter Iran. Iraq got a bit too big for their britches under HW Bush and our involvement shifted. Those policies continued under Bill Clinton with no fly zones. G Bush then shifted towards regime change, further escalating us against Iraq.
Just a quick clarification: The Iraq Liberation Act was signed by President Clinton, in 1998. The official US policy of deposing Saddam Hussein started then.
Hillary! voted for the Iraq/Afghanistan wars. She was acting Secretary of State for the Arab Spring, the deposition/overthrow of Ghaddafi in Libya. She drew that line in the sand between Assad and ISIS and got that rolling along nicely. She blamed a non-existent video for the attack and murder of a US ambassador. So yeah - she's been involved, at a very political leadership level, with pretty much all the wars going on in the Middle East for the last 15 years. But when you get tens of millions of dollars from despots and oppressive regimes in the Middle East, you kind of let things go their way, right?
Be honest: Hillary! voted for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, she was "in charge" of US foreign policy during the creation of the ISIS/Syrian conflict, aided the downfall and overthrow in Libya, and sat and watch the Arab Spring roll through. So yeah - she either supported (as an elected leader and/or cabinet member) or had a position (SecState) to affect and possibly stop all the conflicts going on in the Middle East.
When you're playing with 2000+ stores, each of whom want 15-20 of your products, you're talking about 40,000+ units sitting on the shelf. And that is money that you spent to build the products that you won't get back for several months. A major crimp in cash flow - which causes companies to fold.
It is the weeds that matter, when companies put on their big boy pants and step out of the startup mode. Cash flow, amortization, lead times - all end up strangling you and are much, much harder to solve than "how to raise another few million dollars". I know, I've been through both situations (established, profitable company and startup).
That's about the same sales pace as Apple TV, annually. So I assume that if the Echo isn't a hit - neither is the Apple TV. Which doesn't bode well for Apple's play into the living room...
I have a house full of Z Wave stuff (SmartThings), SONOS speakers, Samsung smart TVs, and a few Alexas to integrate it. It's nice to have it all integrated, and as I go on with my day the house responds and takes care of itself. Watering the garden, turning on and off lights and heating, playing the media I want, even recognizing when I ride up on my motorcycle and automatically opening the garage door and turning on some lights for me (if it's after dark), with no need to fumble for a remote.
Apple tried several times - and lost (speakers, various TV and media servers, etc). The only way they become relevant in the living room is if they buy a major player in the living room, like Netflix (content) or SONOS (audio delivery) or Vizio (video delivery). Short of that - they're not going to make headway.
Net 30 terms are incredibly rare in big-box store sales. Typically net-60 or even net-90. And you also have to pay for promotional expenses, shelf space, marketing accommodations, etc. Those are costs up-front, prior to shipment of product.
No worries! That is correct - you cannot really infringe a dependent claim without infringing its independent claim, too. Now many times you have multiple dependent claims in a patent, because you assume the very broad independent claim will get tossed, and thus the dependent claims will survive once all that is stuffed together. For example, a white paper bag with 60% or more post-consumer content will get tossed, but some of the dependent claims (with much more detail) may survive.
Yes, because that sheriff never has deputies, right? The size of county sheriff forces tends to be quite large, and they have authority over violations outside of cities, and can assume jurisdiction in cities as well for specific issues. To dismiss sheriffs is pretty stupid.
County Sheriffs don't have any power? In most States, they supercede city police... At least that's the way it is out West, in CA, OR, WA, NV, AZ, MT, ID, UT, etc.
I take it you're patent lawyer? I've been down this path several times (defending my own patents, as well as trying to attack others). Never seen a case where a dependent claim survived removal of the independent claim. A narrowing of scope doesn't survive if the fundamental basis was bad in the first place. It's why you do several independent claims that are broad, narrow, narrowest. Rather than do what Apple did which is 3 completely unrelated independent claims.
Yes, the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy goes that deep! They play 4D chess when everyone else is doing tic tac toe! Tighten your tinfoil hat, man, they can READ that shit...
Yes, let's put effort into enforcing the law. Of course, that's a power reserved for the Governments, not a private organization. So - if the existing Governments (State and Federal) choose not to enforce existing laws, why do you want them to create even more new laws? Either enforce what is there, or rescind it and replace. Don't simply ignore-and-add.
See Dillon's Rule. States power overrides that of their cities/towns and counties. And this is pretty much always codified in the State's constitution as well - that the State retains the right to set laws and dictates within its borders, that municipalities are under the governance of the State.
The federal government is granted the ability to override the state government with regards to interstate commerce.
Well, regulate interstate commerce, not override it. And how does Internet sold from one city in the State to another city in the State become interstate commerce? The data may be interstate, but unless that fiber crosses a State boundary - it's intrastate and the Federal Government is not supposed to have overriding jurisdiction there.
Nah, this is standard Apple deflection. "It's so few, we can't replicate, no response"... And then say "you're holding/using/carrying it wrong" and walk away. Except Samsung didn't walk away...
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is, Google actually turns a net profit on big revenues. Uber's losses are larger than it's revenues (meaning they are burning 100% of revenue - AND still consuming additional investment funds). Google's value is inflated IMHO, but there is real value there. Uber's value is 100% speculative.
No, that's about the right amount of gross profit for a successful software platform. Microsoft tends to make around 60-70% gross margins, and they are predominantly a software company. So yeah - 70% gross margin sounds about right.
Damn, you could have made $15 per hour for your protesting!
Thank goodness that Janet Reno ignored the advice of her own campaign task force head and didn't appoint an independent investigator into the fundings of the DNC and the Clinton re-election campaigns...
The middle east issues go back to Carter and beyond. Iraq was boosted to counter Iran. Iraq got a bit too big for their britches under HW Bush and our involvement shifted. Those policies continued under Bill Clinton with no fly zones. G Bush then shifted towards regime change, further escalating us against Iraq.
Just a quick clarification: The Iraq Liberation Act was signed by President Clinton, in 1998. The official US policy of deposing Saddam Hussein started then.
Hillary! voted for the Iraq/Afghanistan wars. She was acting Secretary of State for the Arab Spring, the deposition/overthrow of Ghaddafi in Libya. She drew that line in the sand between Assad and ISIS and got that rolling along nicely. She blamed a non-existent video for the attack and murder of a US ambassador. So yeah - she's been involved, at a very political leadership level, with pretty much all the wars going on in the Middle East for the last 15 years. But when you get tens of millions of dollars from despots and oppressive regimes in the Middle East, you kind of let things go their way, right?
Be honest: Hillary! voted for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, she was "in charge" of US foreign policy during the creation of the ISIS/Syrian conflict, aided the downfall and overthrow in Libya, and sat and watch the Arab Spring roll through. So yeah - she either supported (as an elected leader and/or cabinet member) or had a position (SecState) to affect and possibly stop all the conflicts going on in the Middle East.
When you're playing with 2000+ stores, each of whom want 15-20 of your products, you're talking about 40,000+ units sitting on the shelf. And that is money that you spent to build the products that you won't get back for several months. A major crimp in cash flow - which causes companies to fold.
It is the weeds that matter, when companies put on their big boy pants and step out of the startup mode. Cash flow, amortization, lead times - all end up strangling you and are much, much harder to solve than "how to raise another few million dollars". I know, I've been through both situations (established, profitable company and startup).
That's about the same sales pace as Apple TV, annually. So I assume that if the Echo isn't a hit - neither is the Apple TV. Which doesn't bode well for Apple's play into the living room...
Here you go. They've sold around 4-5 million so far, and are expecting 10 million next year. That's pretty good volume for a $180 consumer product.
I have a house full of Z Wave stuff (SmartThings), SONOS speakers, Samsung smart TVs, and a few Alexas to integrate it. It's nice to have it all integrated, and as I go on with my day the house responds and takes care of itself. Watering the garden, turning on and off lights and heating, playing the media I want, even recognizing when I ride up on my motorcycle and automatically opening the garage door and turning on some lights for me (if it's after dark), with no need to fumble for a remote.
Apple tried several times - and lost (speakers, various TV and media servers, etc). The only way they become relevant in the living room is if they buy a major player in the living room, like Netflix (content) or SONOS (audio delivery) or Vizio (video delivery). Short of that - they're not going to make headway.
Net 30 terms are incredibly rare in big-box store sales. Typically net-60 or even net-90. And you also have to pay for promotional expenses, shelf space, marketing accommodations, etc. Those are costs up-front, prior to shipment of product.
No worries! That is correct - you cannot really infringe a dependent claim without infringing its independent claim, too. Now many times you have multiple dependent claims in a patent, because you assume the very broad independent claim will get tossed, and thus the dependent claims will survive once all that is stuffed together. For example, a white paper bag with 60% or more post-consumer content will get tossed, but some of the dependent claims (with much more detail) may survive.
That was an AC, you're not. Simple as that. Plus I generally don't like Apple Asshats...
Yes, because that sheriff never has deputies, right? The size of county sheriff forces tends to be quite large, and they have authority over violations outside of cities, and can assume jurisdiction in cities as well for specific issues. To dismiss sheriffs is pretty stupid.
County Sheriffs don't have any power? In most States, they supercede city police... At least that's the way it is out West, in CA, OR, WA, NV, AZ, MT, ID, UT, etc.
I take it you're patent lawyer? I've been down this path several times (defending my own patents, as well as trying to attack others). Never seen a case where a dependent claim survived removal of the independent claim. A narrowing of scope doesn't survive if the fundamental basis was bad in the first place. It's why you do several independent claims that are broad, narrow, narrowest. Rather than do what Apple did which is 3 completely unrelated independent claims.
Yes, the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy goes that deep! They play 4D chess when everyone else is doing tic tac toe! Tighten your tinfoil hat, man, they can READ that shit...
Damn it, and here I was hoping it would be a fanboy iBadge...
Yes, let's put effort into enforcing the law. Of course, that's a power reserved for the Governments, not a private organization. So - if the existing Governments (State and Federal) choose not to enforce existing laws, why do you want them to create even more new laws? Either enforce what is there, or rescind it and replace. Don't simply ignore-and-add.
City police? County sheriff. Sheriff? State troopers. There you go.
See Dillon's Rule. States power overrides that of their cities/towns and counties. And this is pretty much always codified in the State's constitution as well - that the State retains the right to set laws and dictates within its borders, that municipalities are under the governance of the State.
The federal government is granted the ability to override the state government with regards to interstate commerce.
Well, regulate interstate commerce, not override it. And how does Internet sold from one city in the State to another city in the State become interstate commerce? The data may be interstate, but unless that fiber crosses a State boundary - it's intrastate and the Federal Government is not supposed to have overriding jurisdiction there.
Nah, this is standard Apple deflection. "It's so few, we can't replicate, no response"... And then say "you're holding/using/carrying it wrong" and walk away. Except Samsung didn't walk away...