tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4322545832668802542024-03-18T22:35:42.654-05:00Edward Scott HofLandEdward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-59356112784078247912017-01-03T10:00:00.000-06:002017-01-03T10:00:09.279-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding -- A better way to value your startup<br />
Determine...<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>the size of the existing market</li>
<li>the size of the potential market</li>
<li>when the potential market will go from potential to existing</li>
<li>will the existing market sustain the existing industry profitably</li>
<li>how much of the existing market do you need to survive. can you get it. when.</li>
<li>how much of the potential market do you need to be profitable. can you get it. when.</li>
<li>discount this backwards to today.</li>
<li>discount it further by the risk.</li>
<li>your investor won't want to stay in forever. when can they exit?</li>
<li>step back and see if these numbers make sense.</li>
</ol>
Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-47037592319760297892016-12-29T10:00:00.000-06:002016-12-29T10:00:17.414-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding - Be realistic about the value of your company. Overvaluing your startup can be a deal killer. Here's why. At some point, most startups need to determine a value for their endeavor in order to raise money. There is real potential -- even an incentive -- for company owners to inflate this value. The logic goes something like this:<br />
<br />
<i>We need $500,000 from an investor. If our company is worth $1 million then the investor will wind up owning 50% of the company, so let's jack up the value to $5 million so the investor only gets 10%. </i><br />
<br />
Investors will be on the lookout for it, they will spot it, they will test it, and if the owners can't prove up the valuation <i>to the investor's satisfaction</i> then the deal will probably be off and any potential relationship will be over. The company would then have two problems: 1] they still need to raise money, and 2] they now have to explain to the next investor prospect why the previous prospect balked.<br />
<br />
This is the wrong approach. Don't use it.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-75180446388426699542016-12-27T10:00:00.000-06:002016-12-27T10:00:19.554-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding - In the early days, don't rely on just one or two investors for all your capital. Here's why. Sooner or later, lots of deals need more money than their management originally thought. In those situations, it is much easier for all involved to raise that additional cash from, say, six to ten investors than it is from just one or two. If you have just a couple of investors, and they turn you down for more money, then you have to 1] go to newer investors, who will know you are in a tight spot, and 2] figure out how you're going to dilute the ownership of the investor(s) already in the deal. It won't be fun.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-77725931179223886972016-12-21T10:00:00.000-06:002016-12-21T10:00:18.878-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding - Whoever does the talking needs to have skin in the game Why? Because potential investors want to build relationships with fellow travelers -- people who will be there through thick and thin to make the deal work. This person does not have to be the lead investor, but they need to have significant cash at risk. Note that it needs to be <i style="font-weight: bold;">cash</i> at risk.<b> </b>A consulting fee does not count, even if it is subject to some successful outcome. Further, that cash needs to be at risk on the same terms as the prospective investor's cash. Otherwise, potential investors will probably conclude that this person they are building a relationship with may never be seen again. That would be a mistake.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-20488354903734325112016-12-19T11:00:00.000-06:002016-12-19T11:00:04.754-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding -- Ventures need a "lead" investor The "lead" investor is somebody who has invested in similar deals before and has been successful. They know the industry(-ies), the players, the rules, etc.; they have credibility and do most of the talking in meetings with potential future investors when the company is ready to ramp up. The lead investor does not necessarily have to be the first person to invest in a venture, nor do they have to be the biggest investor in the deal, but their investment should be substantial and it should be long-term. Obviously, it helps if the lead investor knows -- or, perhaps, develops meaningful relationships with -- VCs or other candidates for subsequent investment.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-19624515372501362922016-12-15T17:47:00.003-06:002016-12-15T17:47:54.934-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding -- New investors will not reimburse previous expenses Investors who join a venture that is already established want their money to be used on projects and/or operations that occur <i>after </i>they make their investment. This is especially true of professional, truly arms-length investors (not friends or family). They do not want their money to be used to pay old bills. It is important for the initial investors in a venture to be aware of this; the money they put into the deal will not be returned or reimbursed to them by subsequent investors. In other words, their money could be in for a very long time.<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
An exception to this would be when a subsequent investor buys out an investor that bought in to a deal earlier. However, it is unlikely that that would happen without a deep discount.</div>
Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-91684675333275719742016-12-08T10:43:00.001-06:002016-12-15T17:22:10.367-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding -- The right number of people to meet with prospective investors Generally, if you're seeking funding you want the right number of people from your side attending meetings with investors (or donors), especially exploratory meetings. My preference is to have one or two <i><b>key</b></i> people, three tops. More than that can be a problem. Here's why.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Especially in the early stages, a relationship is being built and trust is being established. Having excess people in the room can distract from that goal.</li>
<li>You want all parties to leave meetings feeling as though something significant has been accomplished -- the ball has been moved downfield. Having too many people with too many different agendas, lines of questioning, approaches to the problem, etc., can clog the conversation and prevent that from happening.</li>
<li>The simple fact that one side brought many more people to the meeting than the other can become the most memorable aspect of a meeting, distracting from the point.</li>
<li>Too many people in the room, especially on the side of those seeking funding, can come across as weak. Why did so many people come? Is there a lack of trust? A lack of shared belief in other peoples' abilities? Is somebody afraid they're going to be left out? Is somebody desperate?</li>
</ol>
<div>
While I have seen the above happen on several occasions, there can be exceptions. In situations where there are multiple kinds of expertise involved you may need several in the room. Or you may want to create a feeling of superiority over the other side to drive home a point. In those case, definitely bring all the people you need. Otherwise, limit the number of participants to just the people needed to build and improve the relationship.</div>
Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-64264184123282386352016-12-06T12:10:00.002-06:002016-12-15T17:21:53.254-06:00Lessons Learned Seeking Funding -- Investors want the right "fit" I want to share some things that I learned about raising money. My hope is that my experience will benefit others else who find themselves in a similar position. I will have at least five posts on this topic, maybe more. Here's some background. <br />
<br />
I gained this experience working as the chief market researcher for an organization that sought funding to establish its business and fund development of its products. In addition to market research, I also searched for, set up and participated in meetings with potential investors. These are the things I wish I had known going in to those meetings.<br />
<br />
<b>First</b>, most investors (and donors) want or need a certain "fit" for their money. The fact that you have a great idea, cause or invention has nothing to do with this. As such -- and I cannot emphasize this enough -- <b>you cannot take it as a personal rejection</b> if what you're doing doesn't match what they are looking for. If the fit is not there, then you should not push the point.<br />
<br />
What constitutes a good fit? It varies from investor to investor. And if you don't know their criteria (which may well be the case) then simply ask. Criteria may include...<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>The field of endeavor they prefer,</li>
<li>The investments (or donations) they have already made,</li>
<li>The problem you are trying to solve,</li>
<li>The amount of money you need,</li>
<li>When you want the money,</li>
<li>When they can realistically expect to see a return,</li>
<li>How much of a return they will get, and</li>
<li>Your experience in</li>
<ol>
<li>The field of endeavor</li>
<li>Managing an operation</li>
<li>Handling other people's money</li>
</ol>
</ol>
<div>
My inclination for situations where it is not an automatic fit: Be open about that fact and explore it. See if there's an opportunity anyway. <b>If there's no fit, then leave on an up note.</b> Reasons: 1] Most importantly, it's the right thing to do, and 2] whether they invest or not, you want to make allies, not enemies.</div>
Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-57285276548490734822016-10-05T09:38:00.003-05:002016-12-05T18:21:39.971-06:00Why do women get interrupted more than men?Yes, it's true. While the term "manterruption" has sprung up to describe the phenomenon, the fact is that women get interrupted just as often by other women as they do by men. There are several studies that show this, but none adequately explains <i>why</i> this happens. Some possibilities that have been mentioned in articles and studies:<br />
<ol>
<li>The way we're wired...</li>
<ol>
<li>Men converse competitively, whereas women converse collaboratively.</li>
<li>Women have lower self-esteem than men.</li>
</ol>
<li>The way our institutions are structured...</li>
<ol>
<li>With fewer women than men in leadership positions, the power structure favors men over women.</li>
</ol>
<li>Cultural perceptions...</li>
<ol>
<li>People do not interrupt leaders, and men are perceived to be better leaders than women.</li>
<li>Women are less supportive of women speakers if they are in a mostly-male audience.</li>
<li>Men who break conversational rules are "assertive," while women are "bitchy."</li>
</ol>
</ol>
It's possible -- maybe even probable -- that this phenomenon is created by a group of causes. Also, knowing the exact cause may not be necessary to solving the problem. The solution could be as simple as conversational self-awareness and even-handed respect.<br />
<br />
Further reading...<br />
<br />
Hancock, Adrienne B. and Rubin, Benjamin A., Department of Speech and Hearing Services, The George Washington University, <i>Influence of Communication Partner's Gender on Language, </i>Journal of Language and Social Psychology, , 2014 (accessed via the Texas A&M Medical Sciences Library): <a href="https://advance.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Journal-of-Language-and-Social-Psychology-2014-Hancock-0261927X14533197.pdf">https://advance.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Journal-of-Language-and-Social-Psychology-2014-Hancock-0261927X14533197.pdf</a><br />
<br />
Krupnick, Catherine G., <i>Men and Women in the Classroom</i>, Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, Harvard University, 1985: <a href="http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/html/icb.topic58474/krupnick.html">http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/html/icb.topic58474/krupnick.html</a><br />
<br />
Robb, Alice, <i>Why Women Get Interrupted More, -- Even By Other Women, </i> New Republic, May 14, 2014: <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/117757/gender-language-differences-women-get-interrupted-more">https://newrepublic.com/article/117757/gender-language-differences-women-get-interrupted-more</a><br />
<br />
Cameron, Debbie, <i>Why Women Talk Less</i>, <a href="http://debuk.wordpress.com/">Debuk.Wordpress.com</a>, May 23, 2015: <a href="https://debuk.wordpress.com/2015/05/23/why-women-talk-less/">https://debuk.wordpress.com/2015/05/23/why-women-talk-less/</a>Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-75659226414903252012016-08-29T10:54:00.001-05:002016-08-29T10:54:28.265-05:00Why not make Dallas' FAIR PARK more bicycle friendly? I hopped on my bike the other day and rode from White Rock Lake down the Santa Fe Trail towards Fair Park. After a pleasant ride, the trail delivered me (almost) to Fair Park's front door. I entered the park through the main gate and headed north to Washington Street. I then headed east and rode a roughly three-mile loop around the park's inside perimeter. Three times. The parking lots are not -- big surprise -- all that interesting. But the rest of the park is actually very enjoyable. <br />
<br />
The thought occurred to me that Fair Park should be a destination for recreational cycling. This would be a great way for people to get familiar with the park. I can easily see people exploring the lagoon or the art deco paintings along the Esplanade. It would be a pleasant experience. It would also be a good way for people to connect with Fair Park. Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-1317388426963913052016-08-22T16:42:00.000-05:002016-08-22T16:42:04.320-05:00FAIR PARK in Dallas -- Another reason for smaller events Another potential benefit of dividing the State Fair of Texas into a series of smaller events is that it would increase the activity level at Fair Park. Yes, there are occasional school field trips to the Discovery Garden and concerts at Gexa Pavilion, but for most of the year, most of Fair Park is a ghost town. Translation: It lacks vitality; nothing's going on, and that becomes the brand. Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-59391373774811798292016-08-22T16:30:00.002-05:002016-08-22T16:41:36.643-05:00Texas State Fair - Break it into smaller events? Has anybody ever considered breaking up the Texas State Fair into a series of smaller events? One benefit of this would be that smaller events would require less surface parking. Occasionally, the Gexa Pavilion has an event that needs lots of parking, but for the most part all those spaces exist mainly to accommodate one three-week event: The Texas State Fair. The rest of the year, they're empty.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-48145635222681080552016-06-21T14:43:00.001-05:002016-06-21T14:43:51.245-05:00There is no clear correlation between the minimum wage and employment levels. There's a great deal of debate on the minimum wage. On the one hand, there is the argument that raising the minimum wage will reduce employment. On the other hand, there is the argument that people should get a living wage. Well, below is a table that shows what happened to employment in the 12 months after an increase of the federal minimum wage. Be aware that this table was used to refute the statement that increasing the minimum wage <i>always </i>resulted in job growth. In this case, that statement was judged to be mostly false.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDsqbAzgYA9kv3-1v91KN62USvOq5j7xLGB9wPYdMJKKmOj4lHXyDpGaOXdsClT2goobUSfIbEUG9t-CCVoAeo_2oHLFxXUfIaDn3gILmQgMiqRj4N0SY6uO7vEDecEF4IGz-j8rGhAEY/s1600/Min+Wage+Job+Growth+-+1978-2009.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="355" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDsqbAzgYA9kv3-1v91KN62USvOq5j7xLGB9wPYdMJKKmOj4lHXyDpGaOXdsClT2goobUSfIbEUG9t-CCVoAeo_2oHLFxXUfIaDn3gILmQgMiqRj4N0SY6uO7vEDecEF4IGz-j8rGhAEY/s400/Min+Wage+Job+Growth+-+1978-2009.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Source: <i>Does raising the minimum wage always result in job growth</i>, by Lauren Carroll, <u>Politifact.com</u>, November 6, 2014.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
It's clear from the table that sometimes job growth occurred after raising the minimum wage, and sometimes it didn't. Upshot: There is no clear correlation between the minimum wage level and job growth. Why? Probably because wage levels are just one of many factors that influence the economy.<br />
<br />
<br />Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-89049269748013410332016-06-06T11:17:00.000-05:002016-06-06T11:17:39.589-05:00Do income statistics tell the whole story of income inequality?It's pretty well-known that real incomes in the bottom 90% of the U.S. income ladder have only improved modestly since the early 1970s, after having doubled (i.e. increased by 100%) over the 25 years before that. But is it possible that those statistics do not tell the whole story? Is it possible that, even though those incomes haven't improved, the quality and caliber of the things that can be bought with them have? And further, does the improved quality of those goods compensate for the reduced apparent income?Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-52575435952415518252016-05-08T21:45:00.001-05:002016-05-24T12:51:55.011-05:00Idea for a music appWouldn't it be cool if there was a music app that would search for songs based on their beat?Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-10544124894446974282016-04-05T17:00:00.000-05:002016-04-05T17:47:16.116-05:00Things NOT to do at work, #2.Ever get an email that simpy says "see below," or something similar, and has several more emails attached below? It's then left up to you to sort through all the previous emails and ferret out the point. This has multiple glaring pitfalls. First, it is communication by hint, and that leads to miscommunication. Second, it devalues the time of the recipient since they have to spend their time figuring out what the sender wants them to glean from the chain of messages. Third, it's basically rude in that it essentially says the the sender's time is more valuable than the recipient's.<br />
<br />
Instead of writing "see below," take the time to tell the recipient what you want to communicate from the email chain, or at least point out the specific passage(s) you want them to focus on. That will then give them the option of reading through the entire chain at their discretion to find context or other meaning. And it shows that the sender respects the recipient's time.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-58190874382524925162016-04-04T13:38:00.000-05:002016-04-04T22:02:03.904-05:00Things NOT to do at work, #1Be prepared to answer the phone, even when you've just started a new job. Answering questions with things like, 'I don't know; I just started working here' or 'This is my first day, so, um, if you can hold on I'll see if I can find out' are terrible responses, both for you and for your new company. It's important to realize that when you talk in a professional capacity to other people you are directly influencing your brand and your employer's brand. When you use the just-started-working-here excuse up front you come across as trying to lower expectations to accommodate a subpar performance. That's not the direction you want to go.<br />
<br />
The direction you want to go is either, 1] anticipate and prepare for questions by doing some research in advance so you will actually know the answer, or 2] simply say something like, "Of course. Give me a minute and I'll be right back to you," and then move heaven and earth to find out the answer asap.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-32783667985416708832015-03-11T16:53:00.000-05:002015-03-11T16:53:22.049-05:00Does anybody care about quality anymore? '…there may be some inaccuracies.' That was the last part of the description of the attachment to an email I got last week. The sender was essentially telling me that the work he had done (the attached list) might not be reliable.<br />
<br />
In another instance, I was cc'd on an email from a guy who wrote something like '... please excuse the typos' at the end. He was referring to a letter he had written for us and attached to the email.<br />
<br />
Why didn't these people vet and spell-check their own work? And what makes them think it's okay to hand off these tasks downstream? Would either of these guys put "Handed off sloppy work for someone else to correct" on their resumes? (I'm guessing, No. Instead, they'd probably put something like "Conscientious researcher" or "Consistently delivered assignments on time.")<br />
<br />
It's easy to produce half-baked products. And while it does take effort (work) to produce these things, they are not finished products and may even be worthless (i.e. negative value added).<br />
<br />
Half-baked goods have very little value. If you're going to accept an assignment, you should <i>finish </i>the job. Or, put something on your resume like "Consistently finished sloppy work... on time."Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-68419218763371179602015-02-02T19:48:00.005-06:002015-02-02T19:48:55.599-06:00The Price Umbrella in Housing It's important to understand the price umbrella if you're going to build a house or otherwise invest in single-family housing. Most residential neighborhoods in large cities can be categorized as either 1] very desirable, 2] desirable, 3] less desirable, or 4] undesirable. Generally speaking, the price umbrella for a neighborhood is set by another neighborhood in the same city that is one rung up on the desirability ladder. Thus, when the prices in a very desirable neighborhood increase, they make room for price increases in neighborhoods that are merely "desirable." As an example, I will use two neighborhoods in the same part of Texas (full disclosure: I'm a Texan).<br />
<br />
Area A is a well-known upscale area. Most of the homes for sale in Area A are priced at over $1m. The public schools are excellent, crime is very low and, most importantly, the residents are either wealthy and/or have "top 1%" jobs, so in all likelihood home values are safe and will probably continue to increase with the incomes of the top 1%.<br />
<br />
Contrast that with Area B. Nice, but not quite as upscale as Area A. Fewer than 40% of the homes are priced at or over $1m. The public schools are good, crime is low and most of the residents have "top 5%" jobs. Like Area A, home values in Area B are safe.<br />
<br />
The price umbrella indicates that the potential opportunity here is to buy a lower-tier home in Area B, upgrade it but stay below $1m, and sell it. Sounds simple, right? Seems like common sense, right? And yet, I have seen many professionals -- savvy investors and homebuilders -- violate this guideline by building well above $1m in Area B, and live to regret it. They either didn't know about, or forgot about the price umbrella.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-63454345680541574142015-01-08T15:43:00.000-06:002015-01-09T15:48:08.628-06:00Movie That Should Be Remade -- 36 Hours (1964 movie) Good story about a clever attempt by the Germans to trick an American into revealing when and where the Allied invasion of Europe (D Day) will take place. The original features James Garner, Rod Taylor and Eva Marie Saint. The story could easily be updated -- even improved -- for modern tastes. In the meantime, check out the original.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-9897923115568593812015-01-04T15:15:00.000-06:002015-01-04T15:15:48.219-06:00What's With All The Misspelled Words?I'm surprised at how often I find missing or misspelled words in posts from magazines such as Inc. and Business Insider. I've even found them in New York Times online articles. What's going on here? Certainly a computer spell check/grammar check would catch at least some of these mistakes. Is it no longer necessary for professional writers to write correctly? Is there no pride of workmanship in these organizations? Are these articles rushed to publication too quickly? Whatever the cause, it's disturbing that this is level of professionalism is acceptable to organizations that deal in the written word.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-84542019094391593692015-01-03T15:52:00.002-06:002015-01-03T15:52:48.196-06:00Business Plan Tip -- A Great Product Is Not Enough An idea for a great product is often the necessary starting point for a good business venture. But there's more to business than just great products, particularly if the product is something tangible, like a device of some sort (as opposed to an iPhone app). A tangible product needs to be manufactured, distributed, marketed, sold and probably serviced and even updated from time to time. And all those activities have to be supported by purchasing, logistics, finance, management and accounting.<br />
<br />
A company writing a business plan needs to be realistic about <i>all</i> the things that have to be done to build a successful business, not just the product development. (This issue can be particularly problematic for engineers and other hard-science types.) It may be the driver, but it will have to be supported by other business activities. And a good business plan must reflect that.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-72935156043480771282015-01-02T23:10:00.000-06:002015-01-02T23:10:50.720-06:00Movie That Should Be Remade -- The Blue MaxThe 1966 original starred George Peppard in the lead role of a German fighter pilot in WWI. The story is set in WWI, but it is actually about the social stratification and norms that existed at that time, namely that the poor were grunts in the trenches while the wealthy were pilots. The Blue Max is about a soldier from a humble background who ascends from the trenches to become a pilot, bringing his perspectives with him. Peppard was a good actor and popular at the time, but not convincing as a German. That may partly be why the social messages of the times were so undersold (another reason may be that the movie assumed that viewers already knew about German social strata).<br />
<br />
The remake should feature an actor who is more convincing as a German; maybe it should actually be made in German. The remake should also do more to explain how German (and French, and English) society was stratified at that time. This would provide the context for the accompanying message for who is most expendable, and why. It would also explain why casualties were so high.Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-78767438269843370342015-01-02T16:58:00.003-06:002015-01-02T16:58:30.982-06:00Wealthy People Don't Hire Just Because They Have Extra Money.The debate over so-called "trickle-down economics" will probably rise up again with the change of control in Congress. The argument in favor of trickle-down, in it's usual sequence, is that, 1] the economy will be stimulated by, 2] the increased hiring that, 3] wealthy people (and businesses) will do if, 4] they have extra money, and they'll have extra money if, 5] their income taxes are lowered. On the surface, that argument seems sensible and has a certain allure, especially when presented in that sequence. The problem is, it doesn't work.<br />
<br />
Remember this: Wealthy people and businesses do not increase hiring simply because they have more money. The <i>only</i> reason wealthy people and businesses hire is because they see a potential return on the investment. That's it. That's how wealth is accumulated, and that's how wealth is retained. It is <i>not</i> retained by giving someone a job just because you have more of it.<br />
<br />
Now, there was a time when trickle-down might have worked. That was back in the 50s, 60s and early 70s, when our economy was structured different. Back then, people at the bottom and middle of the income ladder had increasing spending power that could be tapped to help recover from a recession. With that kind of economic structure -- where the mass market has the money to buy things and business needs additional employees to transact with that mass market -- it makes sense to cut taxes to stimulate additional buying and subsequent hiring. But that's not how our economy is structured today. First, the mass market these days doesn't have more spending power; by many measures they actually have less. Second, with the level of automation being used today, business usually doesn't need more people to accommodate more transactions.<br />
<br />
The bottom line with trickle-down economics: IT. DOES. NOT. WORK. And when someone tells you we need it, ask them when it has ever worked. Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-432254583266880254.post-54029807824776388482014-12-11T09:47:00.001-06:002014-12-11T09:47:11.706-06:00The 80/20 Rule for Social Media Advertising<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px;">So, I'm getting my real estate business ramped up and I'm looking for people on that offer insights and suggestions for real estate agents and I come across an outfit that looks like a possibility. But I discover that 80-90% of their posts are merely promotional -- Only two days left to sign up..., Here's what you missed at our seminar…, etc. -- so I move on. Why? Because I want information, not a stream of sales pitches. The thing is, there's LOTS of people out there using that very same approach.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px;">Here's a tip for those who want to use social media to promote their business: Don't use it for direct promotion. Instead, use it as a platform to display expertise and insight. Instead of 80/20 promotion/insight, do 80/20 insight/promotion.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px;">Social media is not supposed to be the online equivalent of highway billboards. And unfortunately it is rapidly becoming the next incarnation of the the old interrupt-and-repeat advertising model (the previous incarnation being television and radio advertising). People go to social media to get away from all that, not to find another way to receive it.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px;">Just my 2¢.</span>Edward Scott Hoflandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16411719568662331579noreply@blogger.com0