PBT Consulting

LINKEDIN REPORTS STELLAR Q1 2012 REVENUES AND EARNINGS, BEATS ANALYSTS ESTIMATES, LNKD STOCK JUMPS TO NEW 2012 HIGH

Professional social network LinkedIn (LNKD) just released Q1 earnings and here are the highlights of their earnings call:  

• Revenue - Q1 2012 revenue was $188.5 million, an increase of 101% compared to $93.9 million in the first quarter of 2011. 
• Net Income - Q1 2012 net income was $5 million, compared to net income of $2.1 million for the first quarter 2011, in increase of 140%. 
• Non-GAAP EPS - Q1 2012 non-GAAP earnings per share was $0.15.  Analysts expected earnings of  $0.09 cents per share, with quarterly revenue in at $179 million. 
• Registered Members - LinkedIn now has 161 million members, adding 15 million members over the past quarter.  The company is seeing the fastest growth in Latin America, Asia Pacific and Europe.   

Clearly, the company blew past Wall Street expectations.  Revenue for the second quarter of 2012 is projected to range between $210 million to $215 million.

Jeff Weiner, CEO of LinkedIn said. 

“LinkedIn’s solid performance in the first quarter built on the company’s momentum in 2011.  We saw strength across all key metrics from member signups and engagement to significant revenue growth across our three product lines.”

LinkedIn says this is the seventh consecutive quarter of revenue growth for the company.

Mr. Weiner reported LinkedIn revenues by source as follows:  

• Hiring Solutions Products - Totaled $102.6 million, an increase of 121% compared to the first quarter of 2011. Hiring Solutions revenue represented 54% of total revenue in the first quarter of 2012, compared to 49% in the first quarter of 2011. 
• Marketing Solutions Products - Totaled $48.0 million, an increase of 73% compared to the first quarter of 2011.  Marketing Solutions revenue represented 26% of total revenue in the first quarter of 2012, compared to 30% in the first quarter of 2011.  
• Premium Subscriptions Products - Totaled $37.9 million, an increase of 91% compared to the first quarter of 2011. Premium Subscriptions represented 20% of total revenue in the first quarter of 2012, compared to 21% of revenue in the first quarter of 2011.

Mr. Weiner reported LinkedIn revenues by geographical source were follows:  

• U.S. Revenues - Revenue from the U.S. totaled $120.8 million, and represented 64% of total revenue in the first quarter of 2012. 
• International Revenues - Revenue from international markets totaled $67.6 million, and represented 36% of total revenue in the first quarter of 2012.

For LinkedIn, it’s been nearly a year since the company’s IPO in May of 2011. And the company has been steadily increasing revenue and profits. In Q4 of 2011, LinkedIn doubled revenue and increased profit, surpassing Wall Street expectations. And the company is currently valued at over $11 billion.

From the product iteration standpoint, Q1 was a slightly slower quarter for the network.

In March, LinkedIn introduced a new version of People You May Know. LinkedIn also launched an embeddable “Follow” button that companies can add to their websites. And LinkedIn made the acquisition of contact manager Rapportive official.

Last week, the company debuted its iPad app, which was a key step in the company’s mobile strategy.

The company will refresh many of its pillar products this year. LinkedIn is expected to have 5.3 billion professional searches in 2012.

Mobile continues to be the fast growing product for LinkedIn.

COMMENTARY:     That's what I call a very impressive Q1 2012 earnings call, but I didn't feel this way until now.  

Right after LinkedIn had its IPO in May 2011, many social media analysts believed that its incredible market valuation was not justified and that its price earnings multiple was ridiculous.  It took a beating from both social media experts and Wall Street experts who thought it represented evidence of a tech bubble.

LinkedIn was of tremendous interest to me because it is the third largest U.S. social network after Facebook and Twitter, and it was the first major social media IPO, and how their IPO performed would set the standard for how future social media IPO's would be valued.  

My blog post dated May 23, 2011 is Part I of a 9-Part series analyzing the LinkedIn IPO from just about every conceivable angle.  Ever since that time, I have been waiting for LinkedIn's growth and revenues to hit a brick wall, but this has been to no avail.  

In hindsight, you cannot treat LinkedIn like other social networks.  The company does not rely on the ad-supported revenue model for its sole source of revenues.  The majority of its revenues are derived from hiring solution products (54%)  and premium subscriptions (20%).  Combined this represents 74% of total revenues during Q1 2012.  Facebook on the otherhand generates 89% of its revenues from advertising.  The remaining 11% is from sales of virtual goods from social games. Twitter relies on advertising for 100% of its revenues.  Both of those social giants are likely to be drastically affected by a slowdown in online advertising. 

Social media is still in the "experimental stage," and advertisers are taking a wait and see attitude towards social, using it mostly to connect and engage with their fans and build brand awareness, rather than as a big revenue source.  In fact, most social networks are having a real problem producing a quantifiable ROI on social media advertising for their brand customers.  This issue could have a bearing on how Wall Street and Main Street value Facebook when it has its IPO on May 18, 2012.

LinkedIn has obviously benefited substantially from the boom in technology jobs.  However, any softness in the U.S. economy, especially a slowdown in the nation's job growth, or a slowdown in the world economy, particularly in the Eurozone and Asiatic Pacific, could negatively impact LinkedIn's hiring solutions products and marketing products (advertising) revenues.  

The U.K. has already dipped back into recession again, and the debt problems in the Eurozone are of major concern.  Unemployment still remains high and GDP growth is stagnant in the Eurozone.

China is showing signs of a slowdown as well, and this could affect LinkedIn's expansion in that area of the world.  For this reason, I would be cautious about LinkedIn's revenues and earnings over the next six to nine months.  LinkedIn's stock (NYSE:LNKD) is now trading at its highest level during 2012, so caution should be exercised.

LinkedIn (NYSE:LNKD) stock price as of 10:55 a.m., Friday, May 4, 2012 (Click Image To Enlarge)

UPDATE:  LinkedIn to acquire SlideShare

LinkedIn announced on Thursday, May 3, 2012, that it plans to buy SlideShare for $119 million.

It will be 45% cash and 55% stock.

SlideShare allows users to upload documents to the web and have them embedded all over the place.

How does it fit at LinkedIn? Here's what CEO Jeff Weiner said in a press release explaining the move:

"Presentations are one of the main ways in which professionals capture and share their experiences and knowledge, which in turn helps shape their professional identity.  These presentations also enable professionals to discover new connections and gain the insights they need to become more productive and successful in their careers, aligning perfectly with LinkedIn's mission and helping us deliver even more value for our members. We're very excited to welcome the SlideShare team to LinkedIn."

It's a great outcome for the founders of SlideShare, Rashmi Sinha, Jonathan Boutelle, and Amit Ranjan. It's also a nice exit for Venrock, which was the institutional investor in the company and had a 15X return.

If you’re scratching your head on just why LinkedIn would spend all that dough on SlideShare, Eloqua offers five big reasons.

1. It’s Like Pinterest for Business - We’re all hearing about Pinterest lately, the visually sticky social network for sharing your favorite links to things like wedding plans, Etsy projects and, yes, even content marketing. What makes Pinterest compelling is the way it strips sharing down to visuals.   Well, SlideShare is kind of like Pinterest for business. You can’t narrate your slides when you upload them so you have to lean on your ability to speak through imagery and a conservative amount of text. It forces professionals to get a message across in a highly visual way, and as a result it’s grabbed about 29 million unique visitors. Those are decent stats for PowerPoint presentations. 
2. It Makes LinkedIn More Engaging - While LinkedIn started out essentially as the combo of an online resume and rolodex, it’s tried a variety of tactics to make the site itself more sticky by getting people to share content. LinkedIn would love nothing more than to have its members treat it like the Facebook of career-related content.  (Pop quiz: How often do you check your Facebook newsfeed? Now, how often do you check your LinkedIn “newsfeed”?)   SlideShare gives LinkedIn an incredible content-sharing platform. We’ll have to watch how the two products get integrated, but I bet LinkedIn finds a way to get people to spend more time on site as a result of this acquisition.
3. The C-Level Loves It - LinkedIn not only likes to talk about the number of members it has (161 million, by the way), but also the make-up of that membership. Nearly all the companies listed on the Fortune 500 are represented.  So it’s only natural that LinkedIn covets SlideShare’s influence on the C-level. According to a recent DemandGen Report article, SlideShare gets 40% more traffic from C-level executives than LinkedIn. That kind of organic prestige is hard to buy – but LinkedIn just did.
4. It Inserts LinkedIn Into the Lead Management Process - LinkedIn has won over the hearts and minds of recruiters and job-seekers, but embedding social into the lead management process is more complicated. But for businesses, especially for B2B marketing, SlideShare is a natural tool for delivering leads.  SlideShare’s lead capturing product, which allows users to embed forms for collecting a lead’s data, brings a well-established method for capturing prospect data to LinkedIn. Combined with LinkedIn social sign-on, the SlideShare purchase could increase LinkedIn’s presence in the sales and marketing lead management process.
5. It Fits Right In with the Rapportive Buy - Just over a month ago, LinkedIn bought Rapportive, a startup that created a Gmail plug-in that ties a person’s email address to their social accounts. So if you email me on Gmail, I can see your LinkedIn profile name, Facebook name and Twitter handle and ask to connect all without leaving my email.  Buying SlideShare fits right in with this strategy. LinkedIn can effectively extends its reach to all the other accounts, including email, associated with a professional’s social identity. Content is shared today through a variety of means, it’s shared on social channels (LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter), it’s found through search (SlideShare is great for this) and we still send it through email. LinkedIn is finding a way to stretch itself across all these platforms.

I am a regular user of SlideShare, and its acquisition by LinkedIn will definitely increase stickiness. However, just how much tangible revenue the SlideShare acquisition will generate remains to be seen.   If you haven't already done so, LinkedIn provides a widget so that you can embed SlideShare presentations right into your LinkedIn profile page, something I do all the time.  

Courtesy of an article dated May 3, 2012 appearing in TechCrunch and an article dated May 3, 2012 appearing in Business Insider and an article dated May 3, 2012 appearing in Eloqua

TECH EMPLOYERS ASKING JOB HUNTERS FOR THEIR FACEBOOK PASSWORDS, AND 1 IN 5 ARE REJECTING JOB APPLICANTS OVER THEIR SM POSTS

Social media profiles are a great way to network and promote yourself, both personally and professionally, but they are also a great way to sabotage yourself with stupid, incriminating content.

And indeed, it turns out that one out of five technology firms has rejected a job applicant because of something they included on their social media profile, according to the 2012 annual technology market survey conducted by Eurocom Worldwide and its associated agencies.

This finding is especially remarkable because a previous wave of the study found that only around 40% of the tech executives surveyed were even looking at profiles of job applicants at all. While that number has probably increased, the fact remains that a large proportion of executives who look at social media profiles are finding something they don’t like.

Mads Christensen, Network Director at Eurocom Worldwide, offered a summary of the findings which makes me want to climb in bed, turn the lights out, and pull the covers over my head forever:

“The 21st century human is learning that every action leaves an indelible digital trail. In the years ahead many of us will be challenged by what we are making public in various social forums today.”

More positively for social media, the Eurocom survey also found that 49% of tech executives said they plan to increase spending on social media in the next year. Of course, social media is still haunted by the unresolved question of ROI, as 57% of surveys said they are still unable to measure the impact of social media spending.

COMMENTARY:  For quite a while I have been warning my readers about professional social media snooping firms like Social Intelligence Corporation, a firm that makes a living investigating what job applicatioins say and post online, especially on social networks like Facebook and Twitter and reporting their findings to employers who hire them.  Social Intelligence Corporation does this legally and there is not much you can do about it.  

Besides verifying prior employment, many employer's are now conducting background checks, credit checks, drug tests, and now social media investigations.  Many will require job applications to sign an authorization giving them this authority.  If you haven't already done so, I urge you to read my previous blog posts dated October 3, 2010, February 3, 2012 and March 8, 2012.   

Now we find that employers have been asking their employees and new job applications to provide them with the password to their social media accounts on Facebook, Twitter and others.  This is the straw that broke the camels back, because it is going far overboard in violating our privacy.   Non-profit organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU.org), PrivacyRights.org and BackgroundCheck.org believe that employers have gone too far so have collaborated in designing the following Social Networking Bill of Rights.

 Click Image To Enlarge

Due to The Great Recession and a slow recovering U.S. economy, jobs in some part of America are very hard to comeby, and employers have become very selective, are using selective and discriminatory hiring practices like requiring that you already be gainfully employed to even apply for a job, others are discriminating on the basis of age and getting away with it, and now they believe that they can legally violate our privacy by asking for our social network passwords.  Well, I am here to tell you that they can't.  So no matter how great that new company is, how great the new job is, or how much money they throw at you, if they ask you to give up the passwords to your social networks watchout.  You tell them from me:  "No!!"  In fact, you tell them "Fuck No!!"  It's none of their business and an invasion of your privacy.  I would also report the incident to the ACLU and PrivacyRights.org.

Facebook agrees with me on the subject of  releasing your social network password to employers. On March 23, 2012, here's what Erin Egan, Facebook Chief Privacy Officer said about the new practice by some employers to ask employees and new job applications for their social network account passwords:

"In recent months, we’ve seen a distressing increase in reports of employers or others seeking to gain inappropriate access to people’s Facebook profiles or private information. This practice undermines the privacy expectations and the security of both the user and the user’s friends. It also potentially exposes the employer who seeks this access to unanticipated legal liability."

"The most alarming of these practices is the reported incidents of employers asking prospective or actual employees to reveal their passwords.  If you are a Facebook user, you should never have to share your password, let anyone access your account, or do anything that might jeopardize the security of your account or violate the privacy of your friends.  We have worked really hard at Facebook to give you the tools to control who sees your information."

"As a user, you shouldn’t be forced to share your private information and communications just to get a job.  And as the friend of a user, you shouldn’t have to worry that your private information or communications will be revealed to someone you don’t know and didn’t intend to share with just because that user is looking for a job.  That’s why we’ve made it a violation of Facebook’s  Statement of Rights and Responsibilities to share or solicit a Facebook password."

"We don’t think employers should be asking prospective employees to provide their passwords because we don’t think it’s the right thing to do.  But it also may cause problems for the employers that they are not anticipating.  For example, if an employer sees on Facebook that someone is a member of a protected group (e.g. over a certain age, etc.) that employer may open themselves up to claims of discrimination if they don’t hire that person." 

"Employers also may not have the proper policies and training for reviewers to handle private information.  If they don’t—and actually, even if they do—the employer may assume liability for the protection of the information they have seen or for knowing what responsibilities may arise based on different types of information (e.g. if the information suggests the commission of a crime)."

"Facebook takes your privacy seriously.  We’ll take action to protect the privacy and security of our users, whether by engaging policymakers or, where appropriate, by initiating legal action, including by shutting down applications that abuse their privileges."

"While we will continue to do our part, it is important that everyone on Facebook understands they have a right to keep their password to themselves, and we will do our best to protect that right."

-- Erin Egan, Chief Privacy Officer, Policy

While I am on the subject of privacy.  I highly recommend that you NOT use company computers to access your personal email or social network accounts or do any web surfing (unless the latter is required in your job performance).  IT departments have been known to track your online behaviors while at work.  Many employees have been fired over this.  About 40% of employers now ban social networking from the workplace even if you are using your smartphone, and if you post something derogatory about them on your social network, you are just asking for problems. Remember, unless you have an employment contract, in most states you are an at-will employee, and can be fired for any reason.   

Courtesy of an article dated March 19, 2012 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf    and an article dated March 20, 2012 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf

GIRLS ARE SMARTER THAN BOYS WHEN THEY ARE YOUNGER. BUT WHY DON'T THEY PURSUE MORE CAREERS IN MATH AND SCIENCE?

IF GIRLS HAVE SLIGHTLY HIGHER IQS AND GET BETTER GRADES, WHY ARE THEIR NUMBERS DISPROPORTIONATELY LOW IN MATH AND SCIENCE CAREERS?

I still remember learning in grade school that men were better at math and science, and women were better at English and art. The teacher (who was a woman), presented the information as a general fact--noting that these were just loose guidelines that could differ from person to person--and I didn’t question it for a second. You know, until I grew up a bit and realized the very premise was preposterous.

But as this infographic (which is really a narrative of sorts) shows us, it’s not enough to right the wrongs of gender perception when people grow older, the damage has already been done.

Click Image To Enlarge

A lot of these facts are likely nuggets you’ve heard before, like girls performing worse on tests when they are required to mark their gender. But seeing each factoid lined up in pseudo-chronological order, from a grade schooler to a professional, it seems inevitable that women don’t stake their place in industries already dominated by men.

The picture is incomplete, of course. We don’t see how the comparative self-esteem of men evolves over the same time. But it’s safe to say that, when only 16% of students in engineering classes are women, we’re doing something wrong--especially when we can all benefit from some fresh perspective.

Twenty years or so after that day in grade school, I’m a writer and my wife is a scientist. I guess that, given these gender-professional norms, you could make a joke about who wears the pants in my family. But it could never offend either of us. No matter what we do, she’ll still be smarter than me anyway.

COMMENTARY:    These are alarming statistics.  Makes you wonder what is the underlying cause of the loss of self-esteem among females.  Perhaps it could be that women simply do not care to pursue careers requiring too much math and science.  There are fewer of those type of jobs, and many of them are in academia or technology centers like Silicon Valley, and they very often do not pay very much, than jobs in the private sector.   Whatever the reason, it makes you wonder if the math and science "gap" that economists talk about and reasons why American universities are producing fewer engineers than China, Europe and India per capita is because of that gender gap in math and science.  

In a blog post dated September 29, 2011, the U.S. is producing more science and engineer graduates (undergrad and graduate) in 2008 than they did in 1998.  However, the state of science and engineering in the U.S. is still strong, yet the nation's lead is shrinking, according to the latest report from the National Science Board.  Based on a wide range of data - from R&D spending to higher-education trends in science and engineering fields - the group's Science and Engineering Indicators 2010 report suggests that U.S. dominance of world science and engineering has deteriorated significantly in recent years, due in large part to rapidly increasing capabilities in China and other Asian economies.

However, U.S. high-technology employers have given our educational system a bad rap, claiming that we don't produce sufficient science and engineering students to fill their employment requirements.  They always seem to bitch about the limitation on H1B visas.  We have already outsourced nearly 20 million jobs overseas, and employers are trying to do the same thing by importing more science and engineers at lower wages.  I remember a "60 Minutes" documentary about why they hire foreign engineers.  They claim they are smarter.  I think that's bullshit.  The real reason is economic--they are cheaper.  U.S. employers are using the H1B visa as a gimick to reduce overall science and engineering wages.   I say, hire American, keep those jobs here, and provide incentives for U.S. students to pursue science and math courses. 

It appears that the shortage of females in careers requiring science and math is not strictly a U.S. problem.   A similar problem exists in India, a bastian of math and science graduates, and important source of software engineers for Silicon Valley.   In fact,  the percentage of females studying science, engineering/technology and medicine are in the low teens when compared to their Indian male counterparts.   Only 15.8% and 16.5% of India's graduate and doctoral candidates are female respectively.   It would not surprise me that similar numbers exist in Japan, a very male dominated society, but I don't have the data.    If anybody does, post it in the blog.   

Courtesy of an article dated March 21, 2012 appearing in Fast Company Design

STUDY: FACEBOOK BEING USED BY EMPLOYERS TO SELECT WORKERS AND THE SOCIAL MEDIA SNOOPING FIRMS THEY USE

Employers already know it’s a good idea to check job candidates’ Facebook pages to make sure there aren’t any horrible red flags there. The reddest flags for most employers seem to be drugs, drinking, badmouthing former employers, and lying about one’s qualifications. But there’s another good reason for checking out a candidate’s Facebook page before inviting them in for an interview: it may be a fairly accurate reflection of how good they’ll be at the job.

That’s the conclusion in a study published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology last month. The researchers hired HR types to rate hundreds of college students’ Facebook pages according to how employable they seemed.

One of the study author’s, Don Kluemper, of Northern Illinois University says. 

“We asked them to form impressions of a candidate based solely on their Facebook page.”

This involved looking at what was publicly available on those pages (photos, status updates, and conversations with friends) and then assigning each person a score for a number of qualities important to being a good employee, such as their degree of emotionally stability, conscientiousness, extroversion, intellectual curiosity and agreeableness. (In other words, will they flip out on you, care about completing tasks, be fun to work with, be creative in problem solving, and be willing to kiss up when necessary?) The review took about five to ten minutes per profile.

Six months later, the researchers got in touch with their guinea pigs’ employers to ask about their job performances. Unfortunately, of the over 500 guinea pigs, just 56 of the employers responded. So the sample is small, but the researchers found a strong correlation between those employers’ reviews and the employability predictions they had made based on folks’ profile pages.

I asked Kluemper about the “personality red flags” that their reviewers looked for. He was a little vague but said that a person with obvious mood swings, who is overly emotional in their postings would not be an attractive candidate. Meanwhile, a person with a lot of Facebook friends who takes a lot of crazy photos would be rated as extroverted and friendly — which are attractive qualities in a candidate.

Key takeaway for hiring employers: The Facebook page is the first interview; if you don’t like a person there, you probably won’t like working with them. The bad news for employers, though, who are hoping to take the Facebook shortcut Kluemper said.

“So many more profiles are restricted in what the public can access.” 

Given the small sample size for that first study, I was more impressed by the second. In the second study, the researchers did a similar assessment of students’ Facebook selves and also had the students take personality and IQ tests. Then, instead of following up with employers, they turned to students’ transcripts.  Kluemper says.  

“We were able to better predict a student’s academic success based on their Facebook page than on the cognitive tests.” 

(Most universities claim they don’t stalk applicants on social networking sites during the admissions process. Maybe they should?)

Of course, there are some legal questions to think about before jumping into someone’s Facebook page. Employers can discriminate against potential employees who seem like bummers based on their Wall postings and interests, but will get into trouble if what the Facebook user has said about their religious views affects the hiring process.

COMMENTARY:  For quite a while I have been warning my readers about the dangers of posting or saying offensive things on Facebook, Twitter and other social networks.   Unless you make your Facebook or Twitter page private, you are an open book, and whatever you post on your social network page, could come back to haunt you, no matter how qualified you may be for the job.  

The addition of Facebook's Timeline is going to be a goldmine for employers because it makes it much easier for an employer to dig up dirt you may have long forgotten about.  If you've said some derogatory things about an opposing political party or candidate, a former employer or co-worker, or even an ex-girlfriend or spouse, even the boss' favorite sports team, this can be viewed very negatively by employers.

Law enforcement organizations and government agencies like the FBI, NSA and the CIA are actively involved and working closely with many of the major social networks to conduct investigations, gather evidence and track down criminals and terrorists.  Much of this investigation and data gathering is done under the auspices of the Patriot Act in the interest of national security, so in special circumstances they may not be required to obtain a subpoena to access your private Facebook or Twitter account. The former Director of the CIA testified before a U.S. Senate subcommittee about the billions Facebook had saved the agency. The director said with a smile on his face,

"After years of secretly monitoring the public, we were astounded that so many people would willingly publicize where they lived, their religious and political views, alphabetize a list of all their friends' personal email addresses, phone numbers, hundreds of photos of themselves, and even status updates of what they were doing moment-to-moment.  It is truly a dream come true for the CIA."

Here, checkout the YouTube video yourself.

   

To assist employers in their hiring decisions, many employers are now using what I call "professional social media snooping" firms to scour the internet to find out what you say and post online, particularly on social networks like Facebook, Twitter, and others.  In a blog post dated October 3, 2010, I profiled Social Intelligence Corporation, one of these social media snoopers, and at that time called it a "creepy startup" and "truly scary" company.  

Apparently consumers hurt by this companies activities filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), claiming they were in violation of the Federal Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) of 1996, 2004 with amendments there to.

On May 9, 2011, the Federal Trade Commission ruled on behalf of Social Intelligence Corp claiming that they were not in violation of the Federal Credit Reporting Act.  This effectively gave Social Intellignece Corporation the legality to provide social media consumer reports to employers conducting background checks on prospective employees.

On February 3, 2012, I told you about the growing trend by employers to use social media snooping firms to help employers screen employees through their social media behaviors. It's not just a U.S. trend, employers all over the world are now using social media snooping firms.  More than half of my readers are from countries outside the U.S., so you should be aware of this.  

 

According to Social Intelligence Corp. CEO Max Drucker, the company focuses on screening social media profiles for the usual suspects -- racist remarks, sexually explicit content, pictures with guns, knives, or other weapons, and other illegal behavior (think bongs).

There are some limits on how employers may use archived social media content, however. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, companies are required to tell prospective employees (or, say, credit applicants) that they are going to perform background check and obtain their permission to do so. Employers are also required by law to tell the applicant about any damaging information they find online.

The majority of my readers probably have nothing to worry about, but if you have a previous felony conviction, been fired for cause, previously lost your job due to a layoff, and you voiced your anger online, you have a lot to risk.  By some estimates, as many as 40% of longterm unemployed may be in limbo and simply unemployable because of their online social media behaviors.   Social media snooping firms have already expanded into the insurance industry.   Their reports could cause you to lose your health or life insurance coverage or prevent you from obtaining insurance coverage.  If you have any experience or information about the activities of these snoopers, post it on my blog, or shoot me an email.   I have a feeling we have just scratched the surface.                            

Courtesy of an article dated March 5, 2012 appearing in Forbes 

 

HOW WOMEN ARE RESHAPING THE NEW AMERICAN MARKETPLACE, THE ECONOMY, SHARING RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISION-MAKING IMPORTANT FACTORS

People are often surprised to learn how frequently Affluent consumers use coupons and other forms of discounts. Our latest barometer, conducted in late January 2012, again revealed relatively strong interest in coupons of all types, along with widespread and frequent use. Among Affluents, defined here as the 58.5 million adults living in households with at least $100,000 in annual household income, we found that:

• 71% use paper coupons once a month or more; 47% do so at least once a week
• 54% use online coupons once a month or more; 23% do so at least once a week
• 58% have gotten some kind of “deal of the day” offer, most commonly from Groupon (46%) or LivingSocial (25%), but with significant numbers (5-12%) trying new or more niche-oriented offerings such as those from Amazon, Google, GiltGroup, and Woot.

Just as telling: coupon interest and usage shows little or no drop-off if we examine more elite financial groups, such as those with $250,000+ in household income, or those with $1+ million in assets. The fact is that a strong value-orientation and “love of the deal” are felt widely and strongly among Affluents; they are deep-seated elements of the consumer psyche that were intensified, not created, by the long-running economic downturn. Today’s “deal of the day” and group coupons further boost interest by tapping into additional hot-buttons – the desire for novelty, and the quest to be “in the know” – that add cutting-edge angles to long-standing promotional tactics.

Although interest in discounts cuts across many traditional demographic groups, and reaches well into the upper economic strata, there is a very clear gender difference: women outpace men by 10-20 percentage points on most measures of coupon use. In some ways, the prevalence of coupons across both genders (but led by women) may reflect a broader and more fundamental change in the marketplace, and in society more generally: the continued ascension of women into leadership roles – in the family, in the marketplace, and in society more generally.

That’s a conclusion supported by “Women, Power & Money,” an on-going survey of women we conducted and commissioned jointly by Fleishman-Hillard and Hearst Magazines. The first wave of the study, conducted in pre-recession 2008, set out to examine “today’s successful woman,” and found that virtually all American women consider themselves successful, and have defined success on their own terms; moreover, the study concluded that she had become the de facto CEO, COO, CFO and CPO of most American households.

Wave Four of the study, released last month and titled “Game Changers: Women Defining the New American Marketplace,”* found her impact has grown even more profound, concluding:

“Her influence within the family, and in broader circles as well, has led to an amplification of her preferences – in a very real sense, her preferences have become the de facto defining preferences for today’s marketplace.”

Several factors have converged to shape these trends, creating a perfect storm of environmental conditions that favor marketplace approaches more characteristic of women:

• A persistent economic downturn, favoring value-orientation, frugality, pragmatic expectations from brands, cautious investing decisions, and a willingness to delay gratification.
• The proliferation of information and choice in the marketplace, favoring thoughtful, considered, and researched purchasing decisions.
• The emergence of social media, which expands one’s sphere of influence, and has shaped the attitude that one can and should express opinions (women are more likely than men, for example, to be a friend/fan of a product or company on Facebook).

On a tactical level, these trends have made the market ripe for coupons and discounts, across genders and income groups. More profoundly, they have fostered a fundamental shift in marketplace values, and marketplace power.

* “Game Changers: Women Defining the New American Marketplace” from Fleishman Hillard and Hearst Magazines represents the fourth wave of the ongoing study: "Women, Power & Money." It can be downloaded here.

COMMENTARY:  

The Economy As At The Core of Female Consumer Behaviors

According to "Women, Power & Money," a survey by marketing research firm Fleishman Hillard, The economy is by far today's female consumer's greatest concern, and this concern continues to weigh heavily on her mind, and her shopping decisions.  Economic concerns have intensified her decidedly utilitarian approach to the marketplace. She seeks value, quality, performance, and above all, substance.  She generally prefers a solid “good” choice over a more expensive “great”choice.  In many cases, she researches purchases thoroughly, and applies complex, category‐specific decision rules in making marketplace choices. And again, her influence within the family, and in broader circles as well, has led to an amplification of her preferences – in a very real sense, her preferences have become the de facto defining preferences for today’s marketplace.  

Click Image To Enlarge

The economic stress that has taken a foothold after the Great Recession has affected how female consumers shop.  Here's what women said about how the economy has affected their spending behavior:  

• 75%+ said:  “I shop differently now than I did before the recession.”
• 71%+ said:  “Life is more complex today than it was before the recession.”
• 58%+ said: “Financially, I am worse off now than I was before the  recession started.”

Her Leadership Style: From “It’s all on ME” to “Leading the TEAM”

Clearly today’s woman remains the agenda setter in most American households. She is the family visionary who keeps the big picture in mind,while also plotting the day‐to‐day course for the household and those who live in it. But her leadership style is less about doing‐it‐all herself and being Ms.Independence. Instead, it is a more collaborative and thoughtful approach, one in which she leads the team (at home and away) in developing and executing the agenda. She readily shares both the decision‐making responsibility, and the credit that goes along with it.  

Click Image To Enlarge

Women as Media: Expanding Social Circles through Receiving,Broadcasting, Influencing

There’s no denying the impact of online social networks on the female consumer, but it is important to put their impact into context. Her online social networking represents only a portion of what she does online, and of course, what she does online is only a portion of her life. Reading and posting product reviews are more common activities than marketplace‐related activities on social networking sites.  Moreover, in‐person communications – in social gatherings, at work, in retail contexts – remain by far the most widely used methods for communication and influence.

Click Image To Enlarge

Improving Lives for Self and Others: The Positive Nature of Her Influence and Communications

Reaching out to others and adding more social elements to her decision‐making is not a sign of insecurity or ducking responsibility. She certainly feels confident and empowered in the marketplace; 71% agree, “Today, I feel confident in my being a trusted source of information to others.” She feels smart and ultimately acts based on her own judgment. Rather, her decision‐making style is information‐oriented, and friends, family and other trusted sources have become among the most influential sources of information that she seeks out.  It is not so much about safety in numbers – rather, it is theexpectation that collaboration will result in a better decision, for herself andthose she connects with.

Her primary reasons for sharing opinions (online and offline) – center around sharing positive experiences, seeing others benefit, and spreading the word about something they feel passionate about. Relatively few are focused on warning others about poor products or services, and only 5% say “it’s what everyone is doing these days.” (Interestingly, men are more likely than women to share product or service recommendations because they are confident that their recommendations are “the right way  to go.”)

Click Image To Enlarge

Her Marketplace Needs and Brand Preferences Skew  Practical, Functional

When asked to list the brands women admire across a variety of categories, the brands named most consistently tended to be “solid,” but not necessarily spectacular.  Across a dozen categories, American women were asked to list the brands they admire, and to describe in their own words why they admire those particular brands.  The most cited automotive brands, for example, were Ford, Chevrolet, Honda and Toyota – traditional “luxury” auto brands ranked far down the list. The same admiration of good, if not great, brands emerges across categories. Olay and Cover Girl. Old Navy and Macy’s. Tylenol and SC Johnson. Kraft and General Mills.  

Her practical marketplace approach also underscores why she admires particular brands. Across virtually every category, good and quality are the terms she uses most, with price typically close behind. Certainly there are some nuances by category – she wants health from food brands, style from fashion brands, innovation from technology companies, service from hotels, beautiful designs from jewelry, and effectiveness from over‐the‐counter drugs. But good quality at a good price (in other words, value) is generally her top consideration. (See below; font size indicates frequency of mention).

Click Image To Enlarge

Sharing Recommendations Differs Among Generational Categories

The tremendous sway that recommendations have on behavior, for example, skews modestly by generation, but in the big picture, is a key marketplace theme across age groups. As shown in the table below, Millennial women are more likely to agree that recommendations from others can be comforting, and to have made specific marketplace choices based on recommendations; however, more than two‐thirds of Senior women agree with these sentiments as well.  

In other respects, however, the tremendous diversity of the women’s marketplace is apparent. Millennial women more frequently broadcast information and make recommendations, and fully half point to online social networking sites as facilitating their shopping decisions. Millennial women bring a different approach to shopping more generally – displaying a more unabashed enjoyment of shopping both online and offline, and paying greater attention to celebrities. (interestingly, Millennial women are also most likely to describe themselves as “stressed” or “exhausted,” while self‐descriptors such as “caring,” “family‐focused” and “optimistic” are lowest among Millennialsand increase with age).

Click Image To Enlarge

Judging from the Fleishman Hillard study, the aftereffects of the Great Recession as created the Era of the Frugal Consumer.  The sharing of information and making recommendations about products and brands through different channels, both online and offline, have become vital in the buying decision.  When affluent consumers making $100K+ are also looking for deals and resorting to clipping coupons, you know frugality is here to stay.

As for myself, I much prefer that my female partner maintain the family budget and do most of the shopping.  Keep me as far away as possible from shopping malls.  I'll shop for groceries to help out, but it's not on the top of my priorities.  I definitely want to be "in" on major purchases, and this matches the findings of the study.  

These days it is very important to take control of your household expenses, knowing where the money is coming from, and how it's being spent.  Establishing a family budget begins with the essentials--things you absolutely need to buy or spend on, and keeping luxuries and discretionary items to a minimum. 

Courtesy of an article dated February 15, 2012 appearing in MediaPost Publications Engage:Affluent

 

GERALD CELENTE PREDICTED THE 2008 FINANCIAL COLLAPSE, NOW PREDICTS REVOLUTION, VIOLENCE, AND A NEW 3RD PARTY IN 2012

The notorious character "Humongous" from the "The Road Warrior" film.  Visions of the future economy.  All he wanted was some gas for his chopper, so he took matters into his own hands.

The man who predicted the 1987 stock market crash and the fall of the Soviet Union is now forecasting a  revolution in America, food riots and tax rebellions - all within four years, while cautioning that putting food on the table will be a more pressing concern than buying Christmas gifts by 2012.

Gerald Celente, the CEO of Trends Research Institute, is publisher of the Trends Journal which forecasts and analyzes business, socioeconomic, political, and other trends, and is renowned for his accuracy in predicting future world and economic events which can send a chill down your spine. 

Celente says that by 2012 America will become an underdeveloped nation, that there will be a revolution marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches, and that holidays will be more about obtaining food, not gifts.

Celente, adding that the situation would be "worse than the greatdepression" said.

"We're going to see the end of the retail Christmas... we're going to see a fundamental shift take place... putting food on the table is going to be more important than putting gifts under the Christmas tree." 

Celente also said.  

"America's going to go through a transition the likes of which no one is prepared for."  

He notes that people's refusal to acknowledge that America was even in a recession highlights how big a problem denial is in being ready for the true scale of the crisis.

 

Celente, who successfully predicted the 1997 Asian Currency Crisis, the sub-prime mortgage collapse and the massive devaluation of the U.S. dollar, told UPI in November last year that the following year would be known as "The Panic of 2008," adding that "giants (would) tumble to their deaths," which is exactly what we have witnessed with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and others.

He also said that the dollar would eventually be devalued by as much as 90 per cent. The consequence of what we have seen unfold this year would lead to a lowering in living standards, Celente predicted a year ago, which is also being borne out by plummeting retail sales figures.

The prospect of revolution was a concept echoed by a British Ministry of Defence report last year, which predicted that within 30 years, the growing gap between the super-rich and the middle class, along with an  urban underclass threatening social order would mean, 

"The world's middle classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest. The middle classes could become a revolutionary class."

In a separate recent interview, Celente went further on the subject of revolution in America.  He said. 

"There will be a revolution in this country.  It ' s not going to come yet, but it's going to come down the line and we 're going to see a third party and this was the catalyst for i t:  the takeover of Washington, D.C., in broad daylight by Wall Street in this bloodless coup. And it will happen as conditions continue to worsen."

He goes on to give us a horrid look into the future of America.  

"The first thing to do is organise with tax revolts. That's going to be the big one because people can't afford to pay more school tax, property tax, any kind of tax. You're going to start seeing those kinds of protests start to develop."

"It's going to be very bleak. Very sad. And there is going to be a lot of homeless, the likes of which we have never seen before.  Tent cities are already sprouting up around the country and we're going to see many more."

"We're going to start seeing huge areas of vacant real estate and squatters living in them as well. It's going to be a picture the likes of which Americans are not going to be used to." 

"It's going to come as a shock and with it, there's going to be a lot of crime.  And the crime is going to be a lot worse than it was before because in the last 1929 Depression, people's minds weren't wrecked on all these modern drugs,  over-the-counter drugs, or crystal meth or whatever it might be."

"So, you have a huge underclass of very desperate people with their minds chemically blown beyond anybody's comprehension."

The George Washington blog has compiled a list of quotes attesting to Celente's accuracy as a trend forecaster.

• CNN Headline News:  "When CNN wants to know about the Top Trends, we ask Gerald Celente."
• USA Today:  "Gerald Celente has a knack for getting the zeitgeist right."
• CNBC:  "There's not a better trend forecaster than Gerald Celente. The man  knows what he's talking about."
• The Wall Street Journal:  "Those who take their predictions seriously ...consider. Gerald Celente and the Trends Research Institute."
• The Atlantic Journal-Constitution:  "Gerald Celente is always ahead of the curve on trends and uncannily on the mark ... he's one of the most accurate forecasters around."
• The New York Times:   "Mr. Celente tracks the world's social, economic and business trends for corporate clients." 
• 48 Hours, CBS News:  "Mr. Celente is a very intelligent guy. We are able to learn about trends from an authority." 
• The Detroit News:  "Gerald Celente has a solid track record. He has predicted everything from the 1987 stock market crash and the demise of the Soviet Union to green marketing and corporate downsizing." 
• Chicago Tribune:  "Gerald Celente forecast the 1987 stock market crash, 'green marketing,' and the boom in gourmet coffees." 
• The Los Angeles Times:  "The Trends Research Institute is the Standard and Poor’s of Popular Culture." 
• New York Post:  "If Nostradamus were alive today, he'd have a hard time keeping up with Gerald Celente." 

So there you have it - hardly a nut job conspiracy theorist blowhard now is he? The price of not heeding his warnings will be far greater than the cost of preparing for the future now.

Storable food and gold are two good places to make a start.

COMMENTARY:   Gerald Celente reminds me of a fast talking Atlantic City bookie, laying odds on the Super Bowl, than a professional trends expert and visionary, but you cannot deny the accuracy of many of his predictions since he started in 1980.   

  

You don't have to be a noted economist to make these predictions.  The evidence of a U.S. financial collapse are all around us.  I have written extensively on different aspects of the U.S. and world economies, including:  

• The Real Estate Shadow Inventory. 
• Potential for a Second Real Estate Bubble and continuing real estate turmoil through at least 2015. 
• The Housing Armegeddon in 2011. 
• The Commercial Real Estate Bubble. 
• U.S. Poverty Levels. 
• The Financial Meltdown of September 8, 2008. 
• The Trade Balance Rankings (U.S. ranks dead last). 
• The potential for a Student Loan Bubble. 
• Why high unemployment due to the Great Recession has forced millions of college graduates to live with mom and dad again.
• A prediction by the head of the International Monetary Fund or IMF of a global depression due to the debt problems in the EU and U.S.

In a blog post dated July 6, 2011, titled "The Root Causes Behind Today's High Unemployment Situation, And Why This May Not Change Anytime Soon," I showed in great detail why unemployment will continue to remain high.  This is a must read for any pessimists who believe we are out of the woods.   

The symptoms are everywhere around you.  In February 2011,  I wrote about the impending Peak-Oil Crisis, a catastrophe we will all face because the demand for oil will exceed production (peak-oil). If you have noticed a rapid rise in the price of gas, that's what I am talking about. 

The Arab Spring Revolutions which erupted in North Africa and Middle East saw the overthrow of long standing dictators in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, a bloddy revolution in Syria which continues to this day, and unrest and demonstrations in Jordan.  All of these events have created further instability in the oil rich regions of the Middle East and North Africa.

Adding fuel to the fire is the refusal of Iran to end its illegal nuclear weapons program in defiance of the U.N. and AEIA inspectors and boycott resolutions, and threats to destroy Israel and further threats to the West that it could close the Straits of Hormuz, adds further tensions and instability to the free flow of oil from the Middle East to the rest of the world.

This is not just a U.S. problem, but it is global in scale.  We all know about the financial collapse of several European countries, namely Greece, Spain, Portugal and now Italy, but major developed nations like Japan are on the brink of financial collapse.   Standard & Poors recently reduced the credit ratings of France, Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy.  This will make it doubly difficult for these countries to raise funds and pay their longterm sovereign debt when it comes due.

In a blog post dated January 7, 2012, I told you about passage and signing by President Obama, of the National Defense Authorization Act or NDAA (H.R. bill 1540), which effectively gives the President the power to use our military in purely civilian matters.  Though the wording in the NDAA is itself torturous -- and there is a provision for a waiver from the Defense Secretary regarding mandatory military detentions -- the elasticity of words like "associated forces" and "supported" have left some civil libertarians worried that the U.S. military could be deployed domestically against people opposing future American wars against alleged "terrorists" or "terrorist states."    In effect, this new NDAA law could lead to a police state, in which you could be detained as a "person of interest" or labeled as a "traitor" simply for demonstrating against future wars.  You could be held for an indefinite period of time, denied rights of habeaus corpus and you would disappear into some detention camp never to be seen again.  Does the U.S. government believe that civil law and order will collapse during a revolution?  Why would the politicians pass such a devisive law and destroy your civil and legal rights under the U.S. Constitution unless they are planning for something?

Finally,  in a blog post dated January 9, 2012 (reposted), I told you about the booming demand for underground "Apocalypse" bunkers by the rich and powerful.  They are the so-called 1 percenters with the financial means to protect themselves in the event of a natural catastrophe, or maybe a revolution, perhaps?  These wealthy individuals are well connected and are the largest doners and supporters to both major political parties.  Why would they be willing to pay many thousands of dollars unless they knew something truly bad was about to happen?   While the 99 percenters experience an all-out revolution, these rich and powerful individuals will live in absolute luxury and comfort in plush deep underground bunkers protected from the chaos above ground.      

It does not surprise me then why Mr. Celente predicts a "violent revolution" and that "food will become more important than Christmas".   There is a lot of anger out there.  The roots for the emergence of a third party are already here.   The Tea Party could emerge as that Third Party.   The Tea Partyreflects a lot of that anger, although I don't agree with much of their radical politics, including their racism reflected in their personal hate for President Obama.   The Occupy Wall Street movement has expanded across the country.  Major demonstrations are planned in 2012 in many major cities.  

Courtesy of an article dated January 30, 2011 appearing in Before It's News

 

SALES OF UNDERGROUND APOCALYPSE BUNKERS GROW BY 1,000% AFTER JAPAN QUAKE AND TSUNAMI, RESERVE YOUR SPACE NOW

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- A devastating earthquake strikes Japan. A massive tsunami kills thousands. Fears of a nuclear meltdown run rampant. Bloodshed and violence escalate in Libya.

And U.S. companies selling doomsday bunkers are seeing sales skyrocket anywhere from 20% to 1,000%.

Northwest Shelter Systems, which offers shelters ranging in price from $200,000 to $20 million, has seen sales surge 70% since the uprisings in the Middle East, with the Japanese earthquake only spurring further interest. In hard numbers, that's 12 shelters already booked when the company normally sells four shelters per year.

"Sales have gone through the roof, to the point where we are having trouble keeping up," said Northwest Shelter Systems owner Kevin Thompson.

UndergroundBombShelter.com, which sells portable shelters, bomb shelters and underground bunkers, has seen inquiries soar 400% since the Japanese earthquake. So far sales of its $9,500 nuclear biological chemical shelter tents are at an all-time high -- with four sold in California last week, compared to about one a month normally.

Hardened Structures said inquiries have shot up about 20% since the earthquake -- particularly for its apocalyptic 2012 shelters, radiation-protection tents, and nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC) air filters.

Vivos, a company that sells rooms in 200-person doomsday bunkers, has received thousands of applications since the massive earthquake in Japan, with reservations spiking nearly 1,000% last week. And people are backing their fear with cash: A reservation requires a minimum deposit of $5,000.  Checkout Vivo's video and eerie apocalyptic theme music on their website:

 

"People are afraid of the earth-changing events and ripple effects of the earthquake, which led to tsunamis, the nuclear meltdown, and which will lead to radiation and health concerns," said Vivos CEO Robert Vicino. "Where it ends, I don't know. Does it lead to economic collapse? A true economic collapse would lead to anarchy, which could lead to 90% of the population being killed off."

 

The last time people flocked to purchase bunkers in such droves was right before the Y2K scare, according to Stephen O'Leary, an associate professor at University of Southern California and an expert on apocalyptic thinking.

"Tens of millions of people believe in a literal apocalypse, which involves earthquakes, storms, disasters of global proportions and especially disasters related to the Middle East," O'Leary said.

COMMENTARY:  So long as there are religious nitwits or paranoid survivalists, who believe in the Apocalypse as foretold in the Old Testament, and supposedly predicted in some ancient Mayan stone calendar, and those individuals have the financial means to save themselves from The End whatever this may be, there will be companies like Vivos who are ready, willing and able to fill that need.  

Unlike a small backyard shelter, the Vivos complexes are deep underground, airtight, fully self-contained shelters designed to survive virtually any catastrophe, or threat scenario including natural disasters, a nuclear blast, chemical and biological weapons, or even social anarchy. Each self contained shelter complex will comfortably accommodate a community of up to 1,000 people, in spacious quarters, for a minimum of 1 year of autonomous survival to ride out the potential events.  Every detail has been considered and planned for.  Members need to only arrive before the facility is sealed and secured. 

According to Vivos website,

"Millions of people believe that we are living in the “end times”.  Many are looking for a viable solution to survive potential future Earth devastating events.  Eventually, our planet will realize another devastating catastrophe, whether manmade, or a cyclical force of nature. Disasters are rare and unexpected, but on any sort of long timeline, they're inevitable.  It's time to prepare! Read this risk assessment.

The accepted solution to most of the threat scenarios is to find underground shelter. The soil of the Earth itself can provide the best shelter for most catastrophes, including a pole shift, super volcano eruptions, solar flares, earthquakes, asteroids, tsunamis, nuclear attack, bio terrorism, chemical warfare and even widespread social anarchy.  The governments of the world have been busy building vast underground shelter complexes for the elite. What do they know?  The rest of us are on our own, without a long-term survival solution. Watch this video.

 

Vivos is a privately funded venture, with no religious affiliations, building a global network of underground shelters, to accommodate thousands of people. Vivos will provide a life assurance solution for those that wish to be preapred to survive these potential events, whether they occur now, in 2012, or in decades to come.  Co-own an equity share of the Vivos shelter closest to your home area." 

If you are interested in reserving co-ownership in the Vivos' underground bunker, read this first:

"Vivos is a private network of survival shelters accessible only to its co-owners. Co-ownership of a Vivos shelter is priced from just $25,000* per person. To be considered as a co-owner, you must first become a member of Vivos.  The Vivos Selection Committee evaluates each member applicant's profile for determination and candidacy of their membership. 

Vivos then selects the best candidates for co-ownership of each shelter from the current pool of active members.  We first look for those individuals who may best contribute to each Vivos shelter community, providing the greatest chance of long-term survival of the entire group.  Each co-ownership candidate is reviewed based on a number of criteria.

As final candidates are selected, they are extended an invitation to purchase an interest in a specific Vivos shelter closest to their home area.  Those selected candidates are then provided a reservation agreement to reserve their space in a specific Vivos shelter. 

Once a critical mass of reservations is received for each Vivos shelter, members holding a reservation then proceed to purchase their co-ownership interest.  Escrow is then opened, construction and turnkey outfitting of their shelter is completed, escrow closes, and each owner is provided their co-ownership interest."

Damn, you talk about underground, survivalist extravagance with all the comforts of a 4-star hotel.  That Twilight Zone underground shelter is a shack compared to Vivos' large 1,000 person underground bunker.

Courtesy of an article dated March 31, 2011 appearing in Before It's News

By TwitterButtons.com   

FINANCIAL PANIC SWEEPS EUROPE AS THE HEAD OF THE IMF WARNS OF A “1930s DEPRESSION”

Are we on the verge of another Great Depression?  Christian Lagarde, the head of the IMF, said this week that if dramatic action is not taken immediately we could actually see conditions "reminiscent of the 1930s depression" and that no country on earth "will be immune to the crisis".  Right now, financial panic is sweeping across Europe, but most Americans are not too concerned about it because they simply don't understand how important the EU is.  The truth is that the EU has a much larger population than the United States does.  The EU has an economy that is nearly as large as the economies of the United States and China combined.  The EU has more Fortune 500 companies that the United States does, and the banking system of Europe is substantially larger than the banking system of the United States.  Anyone out there that believes that a massive financial collapse in Europe would not dramatically affect the rest of the globe is being delusional.  The European debt crisis is one of the biggest stories that we have seen in a long, long time and the coming financial meltdown is going to permanently change the global economy.

Click Image To Enlarge

So far, politicians in Europe have held 19 high-level emergency meetings in an attempt to solve this crisis.

All of their efforts have failed.

Right now, this is the situation in Europe....

• Most EU governments are drowning in toxic levels of debt.
• Bond yields have risen dramatically this year and this has caused borrowing costs for most EU members to soar.
• In an attempt to get debt under control, governments all over Europe are implementing brutal austerity measures and this is causing European economies to slow down substantially.
• There is a tremendous lack of confidence in the European financial system at this point and this is causing a massive credit crunch.
• The credit crunch is causing the money supply to drop significantly in almost every nation in the EU.
• Major banks all over Europe are massively overleveraged and are on the verge of failing.

Click Image To Enlarge

This is all so similar to what we saw back during the early 1930s.

In fact, things have gotten so bad that prominent world leaders are now using apocalyptic language when describing the situation in Europe.

Just check out what the head of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, recently said about Europe.  Speaking at a State Department conference in Washington D.C. this week, Lagarde made the following very shocking statements....

"The world economic outlook at the moment is not particularly rosy. It is quite gloomy"

"There is no economy in the world, whether low-income countries, emerging markets, middle-income countries or super-advanced economies that will be immune to the crisis that we see not only unfolding but escalating"

"It is not a crisis that will be resolved by one group of countries taking action. It is going to be hopefully resolved by all countries, all regions, all categories of countries actually taking action."

"No country or region is immune. All must take action to boost growth. Work must start in the eurozone countries and must continue relentlessly. The risks of inaction include protectionism, isolation and other elements reminiscent of the 1930s depression."

"This is exactly the description of what happened in the 1930s, and what followed is not something we are looking forward to."

But didn't the politicians in Europe recently reach a deal which was supposed to fix all this?

Well, unfortunately the deal basically did nothing to fix the underlying financial problems that Europe is facing.

In fact, global financial markets seem entirely unimpressed by this recent deal.  A recent article by Professor Peter Morici detailed some of the problems with the deal....

Investors are rejecting the euro deal, because the agreement does not effectively meet the funding needs of Italy and other Mediterranean governments, address the weak balance sheets of European commercial banks, or fix the underlying structural flaws in the euro architecture.

The €440 billion European Financial Stability Facility is providing short-term funding—guaranteed by 17 Eurozone member states as a whole—to tide over the more troubled governments.

However, those bailouts impose huge cuts in spending and tax increases. Coupled with austerity plans also adopted by France and other healthier European states, those packages are pushing Europe into a recession that could last several years.

What is even worse is that there are signs that this recent deal is already unraveling.  Some EU nations have decided that they are not sure that they want to go along with the program.

The following comes from a recent article in the Telegraph....

Amid fresh warnings that Europe is triggering a 1930s-style global depression, the German chancellor faced open rebellion against the key plank of her Brussels accord. The leaders of Hungary and the Czech Republic told a joint conference in Budapest they were ready to reject the planned treaty changes and implied move towards a centralised tax system. Czech prime minister Petr Necas said he was “convinced that tax harmonisation would not mean anything good for us”.

In Poland, we are actually seeing people march in the streets to protest against this new agreement....

Poles marched under banners that read: “We want sovereignty, not the euro.” They were protesting against the Brussels deal that could see EU countries, including those outside the eurozone, face penalties for breaking tough centralised spending laws.

So not only does this new deal not address the fundamental problems that Europe is facing, there is also a tremendous amount of doubt about whether or not it will eventually be approved.

Meanwhile, the brutal austerity measures that are being implemented all over Europe are pushing many EU nations into recession.

The EU (led by Germany and France) and the IMF have been pushing financially troubled nations all over Europe to make incredibly deep budget cuts.  But these very deep budget cuts have had a devastating economic impact.

In a recent article, I discussed how brutal austerity measures have already pushed the economy of Greece into a full-blown depression....

Just look at what happened to Greece.  Greece was forced to raise taxes and implement brutal austerity measures.  That caused the economy to slow down and tax revenues to decline and so government debt figures did not improve as much as anticipated.  So Greece was forced to implement even more brutal austerity measures.  Well, that caused the economy to slow down even more and tax revenues declined again.  In Greece this cycle has been repeated several times and now Greece is experiencing a full-blown economic depression.  100,000 businesses have closed and a third of the population is living in poverty.  But now Germany and France intend to impose the "Greek solution" on the rest of Europe.

Right now, the flow of government money is drying up all over Europe and so is the flow of money from the banks.  European banks are shrinking their balance sheets and have dramatically cut back on lending in order to meet new capital requirements that are being imposed upon them.

All of this has created an environment where there is not much credit flowing in Europe at all.  When there is a credit crunch of this magnitude, it causes the money supply to start to shrink.  This is already happening all over Europe as a recent article in the Telegraph noted....

All key measures of the money supply in the eurozone contracted in October with drastic falls across parts of southern Europe, raising the risk of severe recession over coming months.

Right now, we are seeing the money supply in each of the "PIIGS" nations fall at a staggering rate.  The following comes from the same Telegraph article referenced above....

Simon Ward from Henderson Global Investors said "narrow" M1 money – which includes cash and overnight deposits, and signals short-term spending plans – shows an alarming split between North and South.

While real M1 deposits are still holding up in the German bloc, the rate of fall over the last six months (annualised) has been 20.7pc in Greece, 16.3pc in Portugal, 11.8pc in Ireland, and 8.1pc in Spain, and 6.7pc in Italy. The pace of decline in Italy has been accelerating, partly due to capital flight. "This rate of contraction is greater than in early 2008 and implies an even deeper recession, both for Italy and the whole periphery," said Mr Ward.

Those numbers scream "Recession, Recession, Recession".

There may be one glimmer of hope on the horizon.  The Federal Reserve has been lending huge amounts of money to the European Central Bank and the European Central Bank has been lending that money out to European banks.  In turn, the European banks have been using much of that money to buy up European government bonds.  It is a massive Ponzi scheme, but it has stabilized bond yields in Europe for now.  This scheme was described in a recent article by Simone Foxman....

That's because the European Central Bank may have already introduced roundabout measures that will solve some of Europe's big problems—it's making investing in peripheral sovereign debt a huge profit opportunity for banks.

Theoretically, financial institutions will be able coin money by borrowing ultra-cheap from the ECB and buying higher yielding sovereign debt.

Essentially, it appears the ECB might allow European banks to pledge everything but the kitchen sink in return for funds. First, the new policy allows European banks to hold far fewer assets as collateral in exchange for funding from the ECB—freeing up liquidity to the tune of €103 billion ($134 billion). More importantly, relaxing collateral restrictions could also allow European banks to use even somewhat risky sovereign assets as collateral for bond purchases.

But this Ponzi scheme cannot go on indefinitely.  A lot of European banks are already starting to run out of collateral for these loans as one Australian news source recently explained....

"If anyone thinks things are getting better, they simply don't understand how severe the problems are," a London executive at a global bank said. "A major bank could fail within weeks."

Others said many continental banks, including French, Italian and Spanish lenders, were close to running out of the acceptable forms of collateral, such as US Treasury bonds, that could be used to finance short-term loans.

Some have been forced to lend out their gold reserves to maintain access to US dollar funding.

So will the European Central Bank keep lending them money once they are out of collateral?

If they do, the ECB itself could potentially be in a great deal of danger.

The truth is that the ECB is already playing with fire.  So far, the European Central Bank has spent over 274 billion dollars buying up European government bonds in an attempt to keep bond yields down.

How many toxic assets can the ECB buy up before they get into real trouble?

That is a very interesting question.

Meanwhile, the rest of the world is becoming increasingly concerned about the financial panic that is sweeping Europe.

For example, Australian banks have been given one week to perform a stress test that evaluates their ability to survive in the event of a European financial collapse.

Why all the urgency?

Do they know something that we don't?

Just like back in 2008, we are seeing massive problems at some of the largest banks in the world.

On Thursday, Fitch Ratings downgraded a whole bunch of the world's most prominent banks....

The banks included Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, as well as Europe's Barclays, Societe Generale and BNP Paribas.

Germany's Deutsche Bank and Switerzland's Credit Suisse were also downgraded.

The global banking system is a giant house of cards.  There is simply way too much debt, way too much leverage and way too much risk.

On average, major banks across Europe are leveraged 26 to 1.

If the value of the assets held by those banks declines by just 4 percent, they will be wiped out.

Yes, that is how serious things are.

And already we are starting to see major banks fail in Europe.

This week it was revealed that Germany's second largest bank is going to need a bailout.  The following comes from a Sky News report....

Germany's second largest bank, Commerzbank, is reportedly in discussions with the German government about a bailout after regulators said it needed to raise more money to cope with a potential default on its loans to governments.

"Intense talks" have been going on for several days, according to sources who spoke to the news agency Reuters.

So if Germany's second largest bank is failing, are any banks in Europe safe?

Just like we saw back during the 1930s, we are starting to see a run on banks all over Europe.

In fact, according to a recent Der Spiegel article, a run on Greek banks has been going on for a while now and is rapidly accelerating....

He means that the outflow of funds from Greek bank accounts has been accelerating rapidly. At the start of 2010, savings and time deposits held by private households in Greece totalled €237.7 billion -- by the end of 2011, they had fallen by €49 billion. Since then, the decline has been gaining momentum. Savings fell by a further €5.4 billion in September and by an estimated €8.5 billion in October -- the biggest monthly outflow of funds since the start of the debt crisis in late 2009.

If you can believe it, approximately 20 percent of all bank deposits in Greece have been withdrawn since the start of 2011.

Europe is in a massive amount of trouble.  The euro is dropping like a rock and the European financial system is paralyzed by panic and fear.

It is going to take a miracle to prevent a massive financial collapse from happening in Europe in 2012.

Unfortunately, there do not appear to be any miracles for Europe on the horizon.

COMMENTARY:    This does not look good.  Right now total combined European Union government debt as about the same as the U.S.  ($14.7 trillion as of September 30, 2011) and soon to go up another

This is scary shit. The countries with the most problems of defaulting on their debt include Greece, Italy, Portugal, Ireland and Belgium.  Many European, U.S. and other international banks are holders of that debt.   Greece alone owes $236 billion to various banks in Europe and U.S.  I thought the U.S. debt situation was bad, but at least we can print money to keep things afloat.

Courtesy of an article dated December 16, 2011 appearing in Before Its News

 

 

 

HOW HEADSET MAKER PLANTRONICS HAS DESIGNED AN OFFICE TO KEEP EMPLOYEES WORKING FROM HOME

The headset manufacturer Plantronics doesn’t much care where its employees work, and to prove that, it’s new offices are outfitted with a cornucopia of features that make telecommuting simple, easy, and encouraged.

Plantronics has a shiny new headquarters in Santa Cruz, Calif., but most employees probably won’t spend too much time there. The space is designed for people to not come in to work; there aren’t even enough desks to accommodate the whole Santa Cruz staff. The audio communications company hasn’t just accepted telecommuting, it has designed around the concept.

Plantronics, which makes wireless headsets, already has European offices that have made the switch to a more flexible working environment.   Patricia Wadors, Senior Vice President of Human Resources at Plantronics explains.

"People change through different catalysts. We wanted to be more open to smarter working, anywhere anytime. [Plantronics’] European human resources had the catalyst of the government telling them they had to reduce their carbon footprint."

So this week, Plantronics opened a revamped headquarters in Santa Cruz that doesn’t have assigned desks, has enough desk space for just 60% to 70% of its employees, and houses a number of giant wall-mounted TV screens, which are intended to bring telecommuters into office conversations. The screens are virtually everywhere, including in the cafeteria.

There are video chat rooms, "focus" rooms designed for privacy, as well as team project rooms. Employees who aren’t comfortable working in coffee shops or at home can opt to use Plantronics’ dedicated spot at coworking space NextSpace in San Jose.

Wadors says. 

"There’s an expectation that you can work anywhere and be highly productive and engaged."  

The office just opened a week ago, but she says.  

"The initial wave of people that walked through and started sitting in the workspace loved it."

Plantronics is hardly the first company to encourage its employees to telecommute, but it’s still rare to find an organization that’s so dedicated to the idea.   It might be a little bit of an adjustment to people used to sitting at work all day every day, but there are some good reasons why workers embrace it: 

• Millennials or GenY - Generations just coming out of school--the one that’s used to having instant access to people through cell phones, Skype, and email--expects nothing less.
• Gas Prices - With gas prices steadily climbing, the prospect of working remotely three days a week seems especially attractive.

And Plantronics has no limits on how often employees work from home--it just asks that they make sure their home workplaces are ergonomically safe.

Will Plantronics ever take it to the next level and bring in telepresence robots?  Wadors says. 

"I haven’t looked into it, but I think I should."

COMMENTARY:    There are four forces driving today's growing telecommuting trend:

• The Mobile Workforce - Millions of workers now working from home, shared office facilities or small private offices.  Many even use Starbucks and libraries as place of work--anywhere where there is WIFI service.
• Redefinition of the Workspace - The Great Recession has forced employers to downsize, closing offices and plants or reducing the size of offices.  Many, like Plantronics have simply limited how many people can come to work by eliminating individual offices, desks and cubicles.
• The Mobile Lifestyle - A new trend driven by the popularity of mobile devices:   Cellphones,  laptop computers, tablets, mobile accessories and wireless services.
• Social Networking - Social networks have allowed workers to collaborate on projects and work assignments remotely and eliminating the need of a physical workspace.  

Courtesy of an article dated December 13, 2011 appearing in Fast Company

MILLENNIALS ARE BRANDS, BRANDS ARE PEOPLE, BUT THAT'S NOT HOW YOU SHOULD THINK OF YOURSELF

The Business Insider Ignition conference 2011 in New York brought in its share of precocious Web natives recently liberated from MIT and other points north. But the insights came hard and fast at the event, held at the Time Warner Center in New York. The location is ironic, given the consensus among speakers and panelists that big traditional media as a monolithic network enterprise is gone, and the media is now a network of nodes comprising individuals like those walking around the streets of New York 10 stories below the conference room.

One comment came from Alex Kazim, founder and CEO of Ongo -- that $500 will soon be too much for a tablet, and that eventually the sweet spot will be $200.

"The Newton failed because the Palm Pilot was $200 and Newton, $700."

Next up was Matt Briton, CEO and founder of Mr. Youth, who spoke about the perpetually elusive Millennials, beginning with the misconception that they don't have lots of money. Well, they don't now, but they will.  He said.  

"They will have more spending power in five years than Boomers have now.  They aren't rebellious, they are humble. But the paradox is that they look at someone like Mark Zuckerberg, who created a business in a dorm room, and feel that that kind of success is achievable. They think the sky's the limit."

He said that while the class of 2010 was all about brand and bling, the class of 2015 is about showcasing your own brand and persona.

"This generation realizes that once they get out of college their resume won't be enough. They realize that their personal brand -- what they have done, what have they created, what they have they built -- is what matters."

The takeaway was that young people are becoming brands, but brands realize they must become people.

In terms of media behavior, no surprise here:

86% of Millennials are cutting the chord on cable, opting for online only.  

"The TV used to be the central place in dorm rooms." 

He said that Hulu, Netflix and YouTube have supplanted cable in media consumption among that demographic. 

Briton says brands need to address five "need states": Utility; entertainment; information; rewards; and recognition.

• Utility means creating something the Millennial generation needs (his example; Intel's "Museum of Me," which allows teens to connect a Facebook app to their profile to create a museum of their lives).
• Entertainment used to be as simple as dialing up a celebrity as a spokesperson or sponsor, but that now, celebrity could be a YouTube sensation like Kelly, picked up by Marshalls for a promotion.
• Information is "not always about product or service, but about the consumer."
• Rewards should be less about acquisition. He said.  

"Brands often try to reward for acquisition, but now brands realize they have to reward for loyalty. Doing that brings organic growth." 

• Recognition simply means spotlighting consumers' involvement in brand equity, a la Wheat Thins showing up unannounced at the house of one of the brand's social-media ambassadors  with a pallet of the crackers, and filming their response.  He said. 

"It's looking at what consumers care about and fitting in that framework." 

COMMENTARY:   Unfortunately many college graduating millennials, unless they have a full-ride scholarship or rich parents, are going to be saddled with so much college student debt (now approaching $1 trillion), that student debt will be like an anchor around the neck of many millennials well beyond five years.  For this reason, I squash any notion that millennials will have more purchasing power than Boomers.  I just don't see this happening because wages have been basically frozen, and corporations are content hiring temps and part-timers than they are full-timers.  

Things have gotten so bad, that economists have coined the term, "disposable workforce," to describe the situation. If you stop to analyze the root causes behind America's the high unemployment rate, it's structural, and there are three key job destruction forces at work including technology.  Millennials need to know these things, but you will be surprised how few do. Jobs are still hard to comeby, and roughly 40% of college grads still have not found full-time job's.

And for those of you dreaming of getting a high-tech job in Silicon Valley, the cold hard facts, there are only about 48,000 internet jobs in all of Silicon Valley.  Yeah, they pay good, if you are a software engineer, know Java or HTML5 and mobile app development, but how many apps does the world really need?  Then let's not forget the free meals and Red Bull you can drink at Facebook and Google, all of it designed to keep you at work, so you work more. I call that exploitation. 

If I were a millennial, I would stop dreaming about the quick buck, stock options and an IPO, and the ridiculous dream of ascending to something like a Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Pincus,  Lady Gaga or heaven forbid Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton.  They are really poor examples to pattern oneself, if you ask me.  The idea of a personal brand is just self-promotionalism and a whole lot of narcissism and sensationalism.  We don't need more brands or apps or more websites, and certainly no more Mark Zuckerberg's.  We need more volunteerism and millennials with a societal mission, big vision and a knack for innovation that will bring forth the new hard core technologies that solve the real tough problems of tomorrow that will endure the test of time.  

I would love to see more math and science majors, more engineers, chemists, physicists, doctors and scientists who can make things and serve a societal purpose, and a lot less hackers.  Ask me what Facebook makes, and I am left scratching my head.  In fact, I have predicted that Facebook's ad revenue potential is really limited. It has already reached a critical inflection point,  The same goes for Twitter, Zynga, LinkedIn or anything social.   It has a cap on it, and it is  60% there already for a lot of these social startups.  I often joke that if Facebook went out of business tomorrow, the only thing left would be lots of servers and office furniture. We would never miss Zuck and his hackers. Employers believe social networks are the biggest time suck ever. 50% of employers ban them on the job.  Tell me I am wrong.  If Chevron, AT&T, Microsoft or Apple disappeared tomorrow. We would definitely miss them.  Think about what I just said. Always ask, "What do they make?"

I am not trying to create a Boomer vs Millennial clash here, but knock some sense into all Millennials reading this. Ask yourself. What does that company make that will endure the test of time.  If connecting and sharing is what the world needs, I would just stick to my blogging and with email and txt messages, and engage with real people you know trust and are really close to you. Besides, there are a whole lot less privacy issues with email and txt messages.  Facebook is now on a 20-year probation including annual privacy audits by the FTC for for numerous privacy violations.  Yeah, Google and Twitter, too.  Did you know that your social media posts could get you fired or prevent you from getting a job? Even scarier, Facebook has become the new Big Brother, and is now under tight control of the CIA, FBI and NSA, and I am not kidding about that. Zuck is now Big Brother.  Do you really want that?

I don't want to come off as being against digital technology, Web 2.0 or social media.  They have their role.  Certainly the Spring Revolution in the Arab Middle East has lived on due to social media and the internet.  It represents an extension of our freedom of speech, but just be careful what you say (see above).  Personally, I am too old to give a shit, I view myself as on a mission to spread the truth, inform and educate you.  Millennials can be haunted by what they did or said on the internet for years, and I have seen some of the shit millennials post online, and it grosses me out sometimes. 

So there it is, all laid out for you.  The future is in your hands.  Go my darlings and meet the real challenges of tomorrow. 

Courtesy of an article dated November 30, 2011 appearing in MediaPost Publications Marketing Daily