ImaginativePRO Blog

LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES DO THINK DIFFERENTLY AND WHAT GEORGE WASHINGTON SAID ABOUT POLITICAL PARTIES

David McCandless points out the biases of each side -- the fundamental difference in how they approach child-rearing.

In American politics today, right and left are often just labels -- Democrats and Republicans alike believe that their stance should be whatever does most damage to the other side. Forget having any political principles. For example, the principles behind "Obamacare" began in conservative think tanks like the Heritage foundation and were loved by the Republican party. Until those principles became Obama's, and then they became a socialist world plot. Likewise, it was Clinton who make possible the lax finance-regulation environment that yielded the financial crisis of 2008. Whatever happened to consumer advocacy, and a check on big business?

Amid all that confusion, it's useful to remember what each side is supposed to stand for, and David McCandless has attempted to lay it all out in an infographic.

Created with data-viz phenom Stefanie Posavec, the chart is actually McCandless's second stab at the challenge; he acknowledges that the early versions displayed a slight liberal bias, owing to his own beliefs, which painted the left in a slightly better light. So he endeavored to correct that. Here is a detail of the left side:

The Left

The Right

It all seems fairly accurate, at least in regards to the basic political principles. (The survey data, however, seems a bit baffling to me -- and its not clear what the source is.) But maybe the most subtle argument within the chart -- and perhaps the most controversial -- lies in the connection between political beliefs and child-rearing. As McCandless thinks of it: 

• The Right - The right-leaning parenting style is based on "respect and fear": Stern discipline that produces a self-reliant child. 
• The Left - On the left, it's "respect and trust," which lead to a nurturing environment that's about self-expression.

There's a nugget of anecdotal truth behind these simplifications:

• Anyone who grew up in the South can attest to the child-rearing style there. 
• Anyone who grew up in the Northeast or California can attest to the PC, anything-goes mores you'd find in your standard top-shelf Montessori school. (The major flaw with this sort of thinking, of course, is that it reflects not just a liberal view, a high-income liberal outlook; I'd guess that parenting is probably more of a function of income than politics.)

But then again, the idea of nurturing your child and treating them as something of an equal seems to dominate parenting books these days; you'd be hard-pressed to find a parenting book about the right way to dole out spankings. But we're awash in books about making a kid creative. Assuming that this reflects an underlying reality of parenting, the present age of parenting wisdom would seem to imply two things:

1. Liberals won the parenting debate. 
2. The next generation of kids should be liberal as hell. The latter actually seems to be true. 

Could parenting be the cause? Studies consistently show that your political beliefs are largely inherited from your parents. So would a kid with conservative parents who believed in liberal parenting mores grow up to be a Democrat or a Republican? Makes for an interesting thought experiment; too bad we can't actually run a real experiment.

COMMENTARY:   I thought liberal states were blue and conservative states were red.  The above infographic has the colors switched.  

I don't know if liberals won the parenting debate or whether liberal parents have more wisdom. I doubt that this is completely true.  I think rearing style and tone have a lot to do with it too.  I've never believed in spanking my children as a form of discipline.  

Things can really go awry when you throw in a healthy dosage of religion, because nobody dares to question the words of God (or Jesus for that matter).  If it says so in the "Good Book", it must be true, so therefore, let's make it the Law.  Our Founding Father's in their incredible wisdom agree with me and even warned of the need for separation of church and government.  In fact, you will not find a single mention of the word "God" anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. 

Having said this, let's look at the political beliefs of the left and the right, more specifically, the Democratic and Republican parties.

The Democratic Beliefs 

• Civil Rights
• Economy & Job Creation
• Education
• Energy Independence
• Environment
• Fair Elections
• Health Care
• Immigration Reform
• National Security
• Open Government
• Retirement Security
• Science & Technology
• Voting Rights

The Republican Beliefs

• The Republican Party believes that the United States has been blessed with a unique set of individual rights and freedoms available to all.
• The Republican Party is inspired by the power and ingenuity of the individual to succeed through hard work, family support and self-discipline.
• The Republican Party believes in the value of voluntary giving and community support over taxation and forced redistribution.
• The Republican Party, like our nation's founders, believes that government must be limited so that it never becomes powerful enough to infringe on the rights of individuals.
• The Republican Party supports low taxes because individuals know best how to make their own economic and charitable choices.
• The Republican Party is supportive of logical business regulations that encourage entrepreneurs to start more businesses so more individuals can enjoy the satisfaction and fruits of self-made success.
• The Republican Party is committed to preserving our national strength while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.

The political beliefs of each party were taken directly from the GOP.com and Democrats.org.  I didn't make any of this up.  

President Washington in his Farewell Address warned us all about the dangers of political parties in the following captions from that speech:

"All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They [political parties] serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests."

"However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion."

I think George Washington had it 100% right.  If Washington were alive today, I wonder what he would be saying.   Also let's all remember this famous anecdote:  

"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely."

What do you think?

For some of you who are wondering who David McCandless is, click HERE.

Peace Brother....and Goodwill to Man

Courtesy of an article dated July 24, 2011 appearing in Fast Company Design

 

 

 

 

HOW RAYTHEON'S XOS2 EXOSKELETON ROBOTIC BODY SUIT WILL TRANSFORM THE SOLDIERS OF TOMORROW INTO SUPER FIGHTERS

 

On September 27, 2010, Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) unveiled its second generation Exoskeleton (XOS 2) at its research facility in Salt Lake City, Utah, during a demonstration with Paramount Home Entertainment. Raytheon's second-generation exoskeleton (XOS2), essentially a wearable robotics suit, is lighter, stronger and faster than its predecessor, yet it uses 50 percent less power, and its new design makes it more resistant to the envionment.  

When Raytheon's exoskeletons first become available to the military (planned for 2015), they will also likely be tethered by power cables, followed three to five years later by untethered versions.  The ratio between actual and perceived weight lifted is much improved, going from 6:1 in the XOS-1 to a whopping 17:1 in the XOS-2. A 50-pound weight feels like only three pounds, and a 200-pound weight feels like only 12.

In addition to more-efficient 3,000 psi hydraulics, the suit has a smaller internal-combustion engine to provide power. Raytheon says the energy problem is "not quite solved", so it is initially pursuing logistics applications such as loading and unloading vehicles, or loading weapons on aircraft, where the suit can be tethered to an external power source. The exoskeleton will operate for about half an hour untethered in the lab.  The suit can react fast enough to allow the wearer to walk at speeds up to 3.5mph. The XOS 2 can also climb stairs and kick a soccer ball. 

 

In the following video, "Iron Man" movie actor Clark Gregg spends a day with the folks at Raytheon trying out the XOS2 exoskeleton robotic suit.

 

Click HERE to view a complete photo gallery of the XOS2 exoskeleton robotic suit and actor Gregg Ckarkson.

Dr. Fraser M. Smith, vice president of operations for Raytheon Sarcos said.  

“XOS 1 was essentially a proof of concept.  With XOS 2, we targeted power consumption and looked for ways to use the hydraulic energy more efficiently. That’s resulted in us being able to add capabilities while significantly reducing power consumption.”

Raytheon is developing the robotic suit to help with the many logistics challenges faced by the military both in and out of theater. Repetitive heavy lifting can lead to injuries, orthopedic injuries in particular. The XOS 2 does the lifting for its operator, reducing both strain and exertion. It also does the work faster. One operator in an exoskeleton suit can do the work of two to three soldiers. Deploying exoskeletons would allow military personnel to be reassigned to more strategic tasks.

The suit is built from a combination of structures, sensors, actuators and controllers, and it is powered by high pressure hydraulics. It enables its wearer to easily lift 200 pounds several hundred times without tiring and repeatedly punch through three inches of wood. Yet, the suit, which was developed for the U.S. Army, is also agile and graceful enough to let its wearer kick a soccer ball, punch a speed bag or climb stairs and ramps with ease.

Smith said.

“Getting exoskeletons deployed is inevitable in my view.  They are desperately needed, and I believe the military looks at them as viable solutions to a number of current issues they are trying to address. With a sustained commitment, they could be in place within five years.”

Raytheon’s Exoskeleton has been called the real “Iron Man” suit because of its ability to enhance the wearer’s strength and endurance in a way that is reminiscent of Tony Stark’s high-tech suit in the films. The XOS 2 was unveiled to coincide with September 28th release of Iron Man 2 on Blu-ray and DVD from Paramount Home Entertainment.

Raytheon Company, with 2009 sales of $25 billion, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, homeland security and other government markets throughout the world. With a history of innovation spanning 88 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration and other capabilities in the areas of sensing; effects; and command, control, communications and intelligence systems, as well as a broad range of mission support services. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 75,000 people worldwide.

COMMENTARY:  XOS was originally developed by one-man idea factory Steve Jacobsen and the engineers at Sarcos, a small robotics company he founded in 1983 that was recently acquired by the defense giant Raytheon Company. 

Sarcos engineers took the military's 40-year-old fantasy of mechanically enhanced soldiers that can carry heavy loads and begun to make it real with the development of XOS1.  Funded with millions from the Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa), Jacobsen and others finally married artificial muscles and control systems into suits that could eventually be available to soldiers, firemen and the wheelchair-bound.  

 

Click HERE to see a photo galary of XOS1, the original tethered exoskeleton robotic body suit.

It looks like Raytheon Company is not the only one developing exoskeleton suits for the U.S. military.  In blog article dated March 16, 2011, I wrote about Cyberdine, Inc, the inventor of  "HAL", a wearable strap-on Cybor-robotic exoskeleton that can expand and improve physical capability and Lockheed Martin developer of HULC, a titanium hydraulic-powered "anthropomorphic exoskeleton" that may ultimately go a little way toward transforming soldiers into superhumans. 

Raytheon's second generation exoskeleton (XOS2) suit is quite impressive, but the power technology required to power an untethered version of the XOS2 (probably the XOS3) has not been developed yet.  The XOS3 will need to charge quickly and able able to supply sufficient power for a prolonged period of time for it to be of any use to the soldier of tomorrow, but I can see it happening in ten years.      

Courtesy of a press released dated September 27, 2010 by Raytheon Company, an article dated July 24, 2011 appearing in Before It's News, an article dated April 9, 2008 appearing in Popular Science, and an article dated May 5, 2010 by Raytheon 

NEW APPLE STORE OPENS IN CHINA, BUT IT'S A FAKE APPLE STORE, STEVE JOBS FURIOUS, CONDUCTS INVESTIGATION

BEIJING—Chinese authorities in the southwestern city of Kunming have launched a sweeping investigation of electronics stores after media reports said one retail outlet seemed to be copying Apple Inc.'s store format.

The inspection will cover business licenses, authorized permits of brand use, and the purchasing channels of each store, said China's state-run Xinhua news agency, citing a worker with the city's industrial and commercial department.

Results of the inspection will be announced to the public soon, the report said. Kunming municipal government officials couldn't be reached for comment.

The inspections, initiated Friday, follow media attention last week centered on a Kunming store that appeared to be nearly identical to Apple's highly stylized Apple Stores, including a winding staircase, blue employee T-shirts and name tags with Apple logos.

The store, which was photographed by an expatriate blogger who uses the handle BirdAbroad, has a sign identifying it as an Apple Store—a term trademarked by Apple—but is neither an Apple Store nor an Apple authorized reseller, according to store employees and an Apple list of its retail outlets.

The Kunming store's manager, who gave only his surname Li, said by telephone Sunday that city officials visited the store Saturday and Sunday to check its products, and said it wasn't in violation of the law.

He said the officials were to make a declaration about the store's legal status by next week.

It is unclear whether the inspections were prompted by complaints from Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple, which is in the midst of an aggressive expansion of its own Apple Stores in China, the world's largest mobile market and No. 2 personal-computer market after the U.S.

Apple has opened four of its Apple Stores in China—two in Beijing and two in Shanghai—and expects to open another in Shanghai soon.

Here's  the Fake Apple Store in Kunming, China:

 

Fake Apple Store in Kunming, China

View more documents from turk5555.

 

Here's the real Apple Store located in Pudong, China.

 

Apple Store located in Pudong, China

View more documents from turk5555. 

 

An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment.

Apple hasn't yet announced plans to open in other Chinese cities, though its next target is unlikely to be Kunming, which is smaller and far less wealthy than Beijing and Shanghai.

Apple relies on a network of authorized resellers around China to sell its products. They design their stores, including the use of Apple's logos, according to guidelines from Apple.

But Apple products are also sold by thousands of unauthorized resellers, some of which buy the products directly from Apple Stores in China or from other regions, then resell them at a markup.

It isn't illegal to resell genuine Apple merchandise.

Many resellers around China and elsewhere borrow from Apple's bright, minimalist design, but few have done so to the degree of the store in Kunming.

 

Mr. Li said his store isn't an authorized reseller of Apple, but hopes to be one.   Mr. Li, added that the store's prices match prices on Apple's Chinese website. 

"We never claimed to be Apple's authorized reseller, but we have a business license and we are running our business by law.  All of our products are authentic Apple products."

He declined to say where the company buys its merchandise, and said he isn't sure whether the store's owners have initiated the process required by Apple in order to become an authorized reseller, but added,

"I am sure we will become their authorized reseller in the near future. After all, we invested a lot in this store."

COMMENTARY:   I like the spirit of entrepreneurship displayed by Mr. Li.  Jobs should grant him his wish of becoming an authorized Apple reseller.  Let's end this charade.  So what if Mr. Li sells a few iPhones and iPads.  That won't even put a dent in Apple's financials.  So long as Mr. Li provides genuine Apple products, and doing so in a professional manner consistent with established Apple procedures and policies, I don't see the problem, do you?   Don't worry Mr. Li, I just wrote Steve Jobs a letter.

Courtesy of an article dated July 25, 2011 appearing in The Wall Street Journal

TWITTER CLOSE TO RAISING AN ADDITIONAL $800 MILLION IN VENTURE CAPITAL, INCLUDES CASH OUT FOR INVESTORS AND EMPLOYEES

In a move reminiscent of one done by Facebook in 2009, Twitter is close to completing an $800 million funding deal that will include a second part in which around $400 million of the total will be used to cash out current investors and also employees.

According to several sources close to the situation, the complex transaction could be completed within two weeks.

Along with basic funding needs, this is largely being done this way to give those with stakes in the San Francisco microblogging company an ability to monetize their privately held common stock and also to do this selling in a more organized — and legal — manner.

That is especially important since the company is not likely to go public for at least a year or more. And, while it could also be sold to a bigger company such as Google, that is also not in Twitter’s immediate future.

Before this secondary follow-on, the first part of the deal will be a $400 million investment for preferred shares by new and also existing shareholders, as was reported by the New York Times last week.

That round will indeed value Twitter at $8 billion, as the Times reported, which is a higher number than in other earlier reports.

This is more than double what Twitter was valued at when it got $200 million in venture funding from Kleiner Perkins in December at a $3.7 billion valuation.

Once the latest investments are complete, Twitter’s total cash haul since it was founded five years ago will be $760 million.

Key new moneybags are expected to be Russian investing heavyweight DST Global, which has invested in Facebook, Zynga and Groupon; as well as the digital growth fund of J.P. Morgan and perhaps others.

Current investors include Benchmark Capital, Union Square Ventures, Spark Capital and several other venture firms, as well as a spate of prominent angel investors.

The latest funding is an important one for Twitter and will up the pressure for its management, including CEO Dick Costolo, to really get its business growing in terms of revenue and profits.

Twitter is still struggling with coming up with a truly lucrative business model, and its execs have presented a number of them, such as promoted tweets, largely based on advertising.

It reportedly has $200 million in annual revenue from its efforts, which is still small in comparison to other Web 2.0 start-ups.

Interestingly, that was a similar situation to where Facebook found itself two years ago, when it allowed its employees to sell 20 percent of their shares.

That financing was part of a $100 million add-on to a $200 million investment in the social networking company by DST. At the time, the tender offer valued the company at $6.5 billion for the common stock, or $14.77 a share.

Of course, Facebook is worth upward of more than 10 times that now, so any Twitter sellers might want to consider their options carefully.

It is not clear exactly who can sell their Twitter shares, and in what amount, in the new deal. When Facebook did a similar move, for example, its top leadership could not sell any of their stakes.

A Twitter spokeswoman would not comment about any fund raising.

But, interestingly, in an onstage interview at a Fortune magazine tech conference this week, Costolo criticized stock trading of the shares of popular start-ups on secondary exchanges as a “distraction.” Like other companies, he said, Twitter had instituted stricter policies to limit the ability of its employees and investors to trade on those markets.

COMMENTARY:   In a previous blog post dated July 6, 2011, I gave several reasons why I thought Twitter was worth $7 billion, and that it would have no problems raising $400 million, but I am flabbergasted to hear that it could raise another $400 million to provide an early exit to outside investors and employees.  That's impressive.   Revenues for 2011 had been projected at $150 million, but the news that Twitter's "reported" revenues will be $200 million is good news. 

I had a feeling that Don Costolo had something up his sleeve.  The early exit is not only reminiscent of Facebook, but also similar to Groupon, which took in a billion from outsiders, but used $900 million of that to cashout its investors and key executives.   This was done in advance of its IPO, which was filed only six months prior.   

It is my understanding that Twitter will not file for an IPO in 2011, but will wait until 2012 to consider that move.   Twitter has only been selling ads since late 2010, but it appears that Twitter's Promoted advertising model, in its three flavors: Promoted Tweets, Promoted Accounts and Promoted Trends, has given outside investors sufficient confidence in the revenue model to write big checks. 

Jack Dorsey, one of the original founders, returned to Twitter as Executive Chairman in late March 2011, following the departure of Biz Stone and Evan Williams, and quickly took over the role of product strategy from Don Costolo.  On July 20, 2011, it was also learned that Dorsey proceeded to clean house, by canning four key Twitter product executives.   This was all done while Twitter was hunting for additional venture capital.   You would've thought that the firings would've been viewed as troublesome by potential investors.  Guess not.  VC's love to see blood in the water.  

In July 19, 2011, Twitter CEO Dick Costolo announced at a Fortune's Brainstorm Tech conference that the company was growing faster than ever.  When asked by Fortune's Adam Lashinsky about the magazine's cover story, "Trouble @Twitter," Costolo listed some stats, saying Twitter had 400 million unique visitors in June, it experienced a 40 percent quarter on quarter growth of mobile applications, one billion tweets every 5 days, and had increased the number of advertisers by 6o0%. Those stats obviously impressed the new investors.

It also didn't hurt Twitter's chances of raising additional venture capital that Apple, to the surprise of many social networking experts, that it is partnering with Twitter instead of social networking giant Facebook, to integrate Twitter within its new iOS 5 mobile operating system that powers the iPhone and iPad.

Courtesy of an article dated July 20, 2011 appearing in All Things Digital 

TOSHIBA UNVEILS THE 'THRIVE' TABLET, WITH PORTS LIKE A LAPTOP, OPENS MS OFFICE FILES, PRETTY GOOD, BUT NOT AN IPAD

 

While Microsoft and Apple are working to bring aspects of tablet computing to the next versions of their computer operating systems, one big computer maker, Toshiba, is going the other way: It is introducing a tablet that emulates a laptop in some key respects.

Unlike other well-known tablets on the market, the new Toshiba Thrive, a 10-inch Android model available this month, sports a full-sized USB port that works with a wide variety of devices and files; a removable battery; and a file manager application like those on PCs. It also includes a full-sized SD slot for flash memory cards and a full-sized connector, called an HDMI port, that can use a standard cable for linking to a high-definition TV.

Some tablets, such as Acer's Iconia, have a few of these features, but I haven't previously tested a tablet with all of them. And they aren't built into the tablet that dominates the market, Apple's iPad.

Like Acer, Toshiba is trying to differentiate the Thrive from the iPad with a lower price. The base model of the Thrive will cost $430, which is $69 less than the entry-level iPad 2. However, there's a catch: It only has half the memory, 8 gigabytes, versus the base $499 iPad 2's 16 gigabytes. A Thrive model with 16 gigabytes of memory will cost $480, or just $19 less than the comparable iPad 2.

 

This first tablet from Toshiba is Wi-Fi only. But the company plans a model with cellular connectivity in the fourth quarter.

I've been testing the Thrive for about a week, and found it to be a mixed bag. Its laptop-like features, especially the USB port, worked very well and will be welcomed by users who have yearned for an easier, more standard way of getting files into and out of a tablet.

Like most tablets introduced this year, it is thick and heavy compared with the iPad. Like all Android tablets, it offers only a tiny fraction of the tablet-optimized apps available for the iPad, which claims 100,000 such programs.

And in my standard tablet battery test, its performance was weak, only a bit more than half of the iPad 2's.

Design

The Thrive, which has rounded edges, weighs in at 1.6 pounds. It's 0.62 inch thick, and about 11" long by 7" wide—shaped to optimize viewing of widescreen videos. That means it's best used in landscape mode. Its back, which is rubbery and ribbed, feels comfortable, and snaps off, to provide access to the removable battery.

Extra batteries cost $80 each, and the company offers a variety of colorful replacement backs for $20 each.

The edges offer an array of switches and ports—some hidden behind little covers—including a mini-USB port for connecting to a PC or Mac. There's a proprietary connector for attaching the Thrive to two optional docks. The device includes front and rear cameras.

There are also a couple of optional cases. I found the standard case to be very bulky. Also very bulky is the included AC adapter, for charging the Thrive, that's the size of a small laptop charger.

USB

I focused a lot of my testing on the USB port, which worked very well. In my tests, I was able to successfully connect a variety of small flash drives and access their files, or copy them to the internal memory, using the File Manager app. Toshiba also includes a Media Player, which handles music, photos and videos, regardless of whether they are in internal memory or external storage.

I was also able to easily connect a variety of other devices to the USB port, including a camera, a wired keyboard and mouse. The USB port handled an external hard drive as well, once I converted it on a computer to the only hard-disk format the Thrive recognizes, which is called exFAT.

I was even able to simultaneously use a flash drive and a wired mouse with the Thrive by plugging in a small USB hub—a gadget that's like a power strip for USB devices.

SD Card and HDMI Port

The Thrive can handle SD cards up to 128 gigabytes in capacity—though the largest of these currently cost around $300. In fact, Toshiba justifies the low internal memory on its base model Thrive by noting that users can add memory via SD cards. In my tests of several SD cards, all worked fine.

I connected my HDTV to the Thrive via a plain-vanilla HDMI cable and it played videos, photos and music through the TV without any problems.

Battery Life

The Thrive fared poorly in my standard tablet battery test, in which I set the screen brightness at 75%, leave the Wi-Fi connected and collecting emails in the background, and play videos back to back until the juice is gone. It managed just 5½ hours before shutting down, compared with slightly over 10 hours for the iPad 2 during the same test.

Toshiba claims the Thrive's battery will last up to 11 hours in more general and varied use, and, while I couldn't test such a vague claim, I was able to go a couple of days between charges while doing intermittent Web surfing, emails, social networking, book reading and game playing. But the screen— which sucks power on all tablets—was off for hours at a time during this period.

Performance

In general, the Thrive performed crisply, handling almost everything I tried and running numerous programs at once.

However, it crashed multiple times. The tablet spontaneously rebooted once when I removed a flash drive and the popular game "Words With Friends" crashed twice. Several other apps also crashed.

Unlike the iPad, the Thrive will play Adobe Flash videos and websites, but, as with other Android tablets, this capability varies unpredictably. Some Flash videos played well, others poorly or not at all. A couple crashed the browser. And the beautiful Picnik photo-editing website, which depends on Flash, wouldn't work at all.

Cameras and Sound

Both cameras worked OK for stills and videos. But the sound, which Toshiba says is superior to that on other tablets, was tinny on several songs compared with the sound on the iPad.

Trial Software

One more similarity, alas, that the Thrive has to laptops is that it comes pre-loaded with craplets, limited or trial apps you may not want. Its bundled version of QuickOffice, a productivity program for viewing and editing Microsoft Office documents, can only view files, not edit them. A security program works only for 30 days before you must pay for it. A printing program will only print five pages before payment is required.

Bottom Line

The Thrive is a good alternative to the iPad for people who place high value on having standard ports, especially a USB port, and a removable battery. While it suffers from many of the downsides of other non-Apple tablets, it is closer to a laptop, and that will please people looking for laptop features in a tablet.

COMMENTARY:    I have been a loyal Toshiba owner for at least twelve years, because they are reliable workhorses when it comes to running all Windows operating systems, Windows and enterprise applications.  I like the fact that the Thrive can play Adobe Flash.  That's my number one bitch about the iPad.  I absolutely love the Thrive's file manager.  When will Apple add tht to the iPad?   I can live with a battery life of five hours.  Besides it comes with a removable battery.  I like the USB interface a lot. It's slower than Apple's Firewire, but I can live with it.  Sue me.  I like the fact that you can run Microsoft Office files, but the inability to edit a Word or Excel files is a bit of a downer, but I could live with that too.  iPad can't do that.  The fact that the Thrive runs Android 3.1 is a huge plus because there are more than sufficient apps available and the new stuff is really cool.  

If I ever buy a Tablet it will be when it can run everything a regular laptop can, something no tablet, including the iPad can do right now.  For me, tablets are laptop "pretenders".  It's time somebody, Apple, Toshiba, Microsoft, IBM, somebody please, come out with a tablet that runs Windows apps and can hook into the enterprise.  What I absolutely love about the iPad is that Jobs' magical device can fly like a boomerang, something no PC can do.      

So what is the bottom line?  Let's look at a Toshiba versus iPad specification comparison

Courtesy of an article dated July 14, 2011 appearing in The Wall Street Journal Technology

comSCORE: 178.4 MIL US VIDEO VIEWERS, 6 BIL VIDEOS VIEWED AND 5.3 BIL VIDEO ADS IN JUNE, HULU #1 IN VIDEO ADS, $2.16 BIL IN VIDEO ADS 2011

 

Video advertising continued to grow last month in tandem with the expansion of the online video audience. Americans watched 5.3 billion video ads last month, up from 4.6 billion in May, according to the latest data from comScore. Video ads also made up a larger share of all videos viewed: 13.6% compared to 12.6% in May. As a proportion of time spent, ad viewing increased slightly to 1.3% from 1.2% of all minutes watched.

Among video ad networks here are the leaders:

• Hulu - 1 billion ad impressions in June. 
• Tremor Media - 753 million. 
• Adap.tv - 677.7 billion.
• BrightRoll - 628.6 million. 

Hulu's total, however, dropped by about 300,000 video ads from May, while Tremor and BrightRoll added about 53,000 and 63,000 ads, respectively.

Time spent watching video ads totaled more than 2.2 billion in June. Leaders were as follows:  

• Tremor - 429 million minutes of video viewing. 
• Hulu - 424 minutes from 560 in May. 

Since broadcast and cable TV shows generate most of the viewing on Hulu, the season's end for many TV series in May likely accounts for some of the drop-off.

Video ads reached nearly half (49%) of the total U.S. population an average of 35.6 times during the month.  Video ad frequency leaders by video ad frequency were as follows:  

• Hulu - 38.8% video ad frequency. 
• Tremor Media - 44.3%.
• BrightRoll - 38.5%.
• Break Media - 37.6%.

ComScore data reflects only streaming-video advertising and does not include other types of video monetization, including overlays, branded players or matching banner ads. 

Looking at overall video consumption, the total number of viewing sessions cracked the 6 billion mark for the first time, rising to 6.2 billion in June from 5.6 billion in May. The number of people watching video increased by 2 million to 178 million, or 85.6% of the U.S. Internet population.

The average time spent watching Web video also increased, to 16.8 hours from 15.9 hours. YouTube drove the biggest share of that activity, with 149 million unique visitors racking up 2.3 billion viewing sessions. Users spent an average of 5.4 hours on the Google-owned video hub.

Video audience leaders for the month of June were as follows:  

• YouTube - 149.1 million viewers; Up 1% from 147.1 million viewers.
• VEVO - 63 million viewers. 
• Yahoo - 52.7 million viewers. 
• Microsoft - 50.7 million viewers. 
• Viacom Digital - 49.5 million viewers. 
• Facebook - 47.7 million viewers; Fell a spot to sixth place 
• Amazon - 23.3 million viewers; Broke into the top 10 in Junemillion.

Hulu Placed 9^th on unique viewer with 26.7 million, but came in first in terms of highest frequency of video ads.

COMMENTARY:  comScore just released data from the comScore Video Metrix service showing that 178 million U.S. Internet users watched online video content in June for an average of 16.8 hours per viewer. The total U.S. Internet audience engaged in more than 6.2 billion viewing sessions during the course of the month, an all-time high.

HULU.com remains the video ad leader as it was in April 2011, with a total of 1 billion video ads ran, 38.8 ads per viewer, but it only reach 8.8% of the U.S. video viewing market in June 2011.  Those are some incredible numbers.  HULU.com is also at the center of various acquisition rumors, with the latest being that Apple is in serious talks to acquire HULU for a reported $2 billion.

Top 10 Video Content Properties by Unique Viewers

Google Sites, driven primarily by video viewing at YouTube.com, ranked as the top online video content property in June with 149.3 million unique viewers, followed by VEVO with 63.0 million viewers and Yahoo! Sites with 52.7 million viewers. Microsoft Sites came in fourth with 50.7 million viewers, while Viacom Digital ranked fifth with 49.5 million viewers. Total viewing sessions surpassed the 6 billion mark for the first time, with Google Sites generating the highest number of viewing sessions (2.3 billion) and highest time spent per viewer (324 minutes, or 5.4 hours).

Top U.S. Online Video Properties Ranked by Unique Video Viewers June 2011 Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations Source: comScore Video Metrix
Property	Total Unique Viewers (000)	Viewing Sessions* (000)	Minutes per Viewer
Total Internet : Total Audience	178,447	6,255,493	1,008.3
Google Sites	149,281	2,311,116	324.1
VEVO	63,003	399,503	112.0
Yahoo! Sites	52,665	247,834	34.8
Microsoft Sites	50,663	286,892	32.8
Viacom Digital	49,493	274,933	76.8
Facebook.com	47,687	167,137	20.7
AOL, Inc.	43,915	251,987	49.3
Turner Digital	30,063	121,301	46.2
Hulu	26,701	156,939	184.8
Amazon Sites	21,247	43,193	8.3

*A viewing session is defined as a period of time with continuous video viewing 
followed by a 30-minute period of video inactivity.

Top 10 Video Ad Properties by Video Ads Viewed

Americans viewed nearly 5.3 billion video ads in June, with Hulu generating the highest number of video ad impressions at more than 1.0 billion. Tremor Media Video Network ranked second overall (and highest among video ad networks) with 753 million ad views, followed by Adap.tv (678 million) and BrightRoll Video Network (629 million). Time spent watching videos ads totaled more than 2.2 billion minutes during the month, with Tremor Media Video Network delivering the highest duration of video ads at 429 million minutes. Video ads reached 49 percent of the total U.S. population an average of 35.6 times during the month. Hulu delivered the highest frequency of video ads to its viewers with an average of 38.8 over the course of the month.

Top U.S. Online Video Properties by Video Ads* Viewed Ranked by Video Ads Viewed June 2011 Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations Source: comScore Video Metrix
Property	Video Ads (000)	Total Ad Minutes (MM)	Frequency (Ads per Viewer)	% Reach Total U.S. Population
Total Internet : Total Audience	5,286,917	2,286	35.6	49.2%
Hulu	1,001,736	424	38.8	8.6%
Tremor Media Video Network**	753,034	429	12.1	20.7%
Adap.tv†	677,708	386	11.0	20.5%
BrightRoll Video Network**	628,600	369	9.5	21.9%
Specific Media**	421,722	214	6.8	20.4%
Undertone**	332,597	171	13.2	8.3%
SpotXchange Video Ad Network**	281,859	171	7.8	11.9%
Viacom Digital	275,230	134	10.4	8.8%
Microsoft Sites	226,951	125	9.2	8.2%
AOL, Inc.	217,347	85	7.3	9.9%

*Video ads include streaming-video advertising only and do not include other 
types of video monetization, such as overlays, branded players, 
matching banner ads, homepage ads, etc.
**Indicates video ad network
†Indicates video ad exchange

According to eMarketer, online video advertising is projected to experience explosive growth, increasing from $1.42 billion in 2010 to $2.16 billion in 2011, to rising to $7.11 billion by 2015.  

Courtesy of an article dated July 15, 2011 appearing in MediaPost Publications Online Media Daily and press release dated July 15, 2011 from comScore

RUMOR: APPLE IN TALKS TO BUY HULU, A DEAL COULD BE WORTH $2 BILLION, BUT THERE ARE TOO MANY REASONS AGAINST SUCH A DEAL

Apple is in talks to acquire video-streaming and subscription service Hulu, according to sources speaking with both Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal.

The rumor is in no way far-fetched. Earlier this month, Robert Iger, CEO of Walt Disney, one of Hulu's owners, confirmed that Disney and the other owners – News Corporation, Comcast's NBC Universal, and Providence Equity Partners – were "committed to selling" the popular service.

Not only that, but Bloomberg's sources report that the content providers in the ownership group are willing to sweeten the deal by guaranteeing a five-year extension of program rights along with two years of exclusivity.

From Apple's point of view, the move makes sense.  iTunes is not a streaming or subscription service – it's strictly rent or buy. Adding Hulu's TV and movie service to Apple's offering would not only beef up iTunes and its collection – which needs it – it would also instantly create a strong contender to Netflix, which is currently licking its wounds after a mid-month poorly handed price hike.

Hulu is privately held, but estimates on the Street are that it's worth in the neighborhood of $2bn. That may sound like a chunk of change to mere mortals, but when Apple reported its "insanely great" financial results for the third quarter of its fiscal 2011 earlier this week, it also revealed that it currently holds $76.2bn in cash plus short-term and long-term marketable securites.

If Apple were to pop $2bn for Hulu, doing so would reduce its pterodactylian nest egg by a mere 2.6 per cent.

Traditionally, Apple has shied away from major acquisitions – so much so that its biggest so far was the bacon-saving $400m buyout of NeXT Software, which brought both the underpinnings of Mac OS X and now-CEO Steve Jobs to Cupertino. Yes, that'd be about $575m in today's dollars – but still far shy of the $2bn or more that it might take to snag Hulu.

But these days, Apple seems to be a bit less tight-fisted than before, what with $76.2bn burning a hole in its pocket. Also revealed in Apple's Q3 FY11 report was that Jobs & Co.chipped in $2.6bn for its share of the $4.5bn that they, Microsoft, RIM, EMC, Ericsson, and Sony paid for Nortel's 6,000-plus wireless-patent hoard.

Two-billion simoleons no longer looks all that daunting, does it? Especially if by buying Hulu, Apple could keep it out of the hands of, say, Google. ®

COMMENTARY:  Company Profile.  Hulu.com operates a website that features video from more than 225 content providers. Offerings include TV shows from ABC, FOX, and NBC, as well as from subsidiary cable channels such as Bravo and Syfy, and films from studios including Sony and MGM. Content is streamed on demand, free of charge the day after its broadcast debut. The company also offers premium subscription service Hulu Plus. The firm was launched in 2008 as a joint venture between NBCUniversal (NBCU, the parent of NBC) and News Corp. (the parent of FOX); in 2009 Disney (the parent of ABC) became a shareholder and content partner.

On July 22, 2011, PC World gave four great reasons why an Apple acquisition of Hulu.com does not make sense:

• Hulu Loves Flash. Apple Does Not - Hulu's Website is based on Adobe Flash, which Apple notoriously detests.  Apple could convert the Hulu Website to HTML 5, but HTML 5 lacks a solution for digital rights management (DRM).  Apple would have to bankroll an operation that continues to support Flash, even as the company tries to kill the format through other means.  
• Hulu Gives Away Content. Apple Does Not -  Hulu makes most of its revenue from advertising, and it leads in number of ads viewed.  Although Hulu offers a $8 per month Hulu Plus premium service, the sites free content remains a big draw.  Apple sells premium content on premium hardware. You don't see Apple giving away free music and videos on iTunes to promote its paid content. 
• Hulu Plus' Value Lies in Its Support for Competing Hardware - iTunes doesn't exist on Android phones, Xbox 360s, Roku set-top boxes or any other non-PC devices that aren't made by Apple? Apple controls content through its hardware, but that strategy is at odds with the Hulu Plus, which aims to support as many devices as possible. Surely, Apple wouldn't want to support subscription video on non-Apple devices, but if it pulled the plug on Hulu Plus for competing hardware, a lot of subscribers would jump ship.  No kidding.
• How Valuable Are Those Content Deals, Anyway? - The main reason Apple would want Hulu is for its content. According to Bloomberg, any deal would include five years of programming with two years of exclusivity. But as any Hulu Plus subscriber will tell you, the current selection carries baggage. Not all shows from Hulu's free Website are available on Hulu Plus, and some shows that are available may only be viewed on a PC. That's all thanks to content providers who are afraid of online video replacing cable. Does Apple really want to pay billions for those headaches?

In July 7, 2011, Mashable mentioned that Hulu CEO Jason Kilar hinted at the possibility of an IPO in an interview with BoomTown's Kara Swisher.  This is a fifth reason why an Apple acquisition of Hulu may not be on the table.  On the other hand it could be a great way for Hulu's CEO to find out how much it's worth on an M&A deal.  Groupon claims it turned down an offer of $6 billion from Google. Groupon thinks it's worth more from an IPO, although many analysts now think Groupon is a dog. Kilar may be using Apple as a way to set a benchmark price. 

In March, Hulu announced that it generated revenues of $100 million in 2010. According to knowledgeable sources, Hulu's profit margins are 35-40%, meaning that it generated a gross profit of $35-40 million in 2010.  It now projects revenues of $200-250 million in 2010, which means a potential gross profit of $70-$100 million.  

Mashable also learned that Hulu has close to 200 people, 50 or 60 of whom sell ads, and that Hulu has 226 content partners. Jason also says Hulu Plus subscriptions are ahead of where he thought they'd be.

I wholeheartedly agree with the arguments against Apple acquiring Hulu.  Another reason I feel an acquisition doesn't make sense, is because Hulu only contributes $250 million in revenues to Apple's total revenues.  This goes against Steve Job's "putting a dent in the universe" philosophy.  Those revenues don't put much of a dent.  Apple needs a larger acquisition, something that contributes tons of revenues and profits, and can dramatically increase shareholder value.  

In a blog post dated July 22, 2011, I spoke about Apple's huge $76 billion cash hoard, and discussed at great length Steve Jobs' Digital Hub Strategy, his grand vision for Apple.  Hulu could be another spoke in the Digital Hub, but there more arguments against, than for such a deal.  My prediction is much bolder and fits very well into Jobs' Digital Hub Strategy.  You will need to read the above blog post to find out what I predicted.  

Courtesy of an article dated July 22, 2011 appearing in The Register, an article dated July 22, 2011 appearing in PC World, and an article dated July 7, 2011 appearing in Mashable

GOOGLE+ IPHONE APP TOPS ITUNES STORE AFTER BUGGY START

Google+ comes to Apple's iPhone, quickly becoming the most popular free application in the iTunes App Store after a buggy first launch.

The Google+ mobile application for Apple's (NASDAQ:AAPL) iPhone leads the top free app list in the iTunes App Store despite launching a bit prematurely from the Googleplex July 19.

Google+ is the search engine's popular new search engine, which according to comScore may have as many as 18 million users. Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) launched a native mobile app for Android smartphones with the inception of the network June 28 but was still hashing out (or negotiating with Apple) the native iPhone app.

Vic Gundotra, Google vice president of engineering, sent iPhone fans into a frenzy with the introduction of the iPhone Google+ app via Google+ on the afternoon of July 19.

However, Punit Soni, lead product manager for Google+ Mobile, said Google discovered an issue with the version of the iPhone Google+ App that was in the App Store.

Soni explained on his Google+ page. 

"When we launched, the App Store started serving a previous test version of the app which didn't have the stability and fixes that the latest version had.  It started serving the correct version a little later. If you downloaded within the first 1 hour 40 mins, you may have downloaded the older test version."

The version number for the new version is 1.0.1.1809. Soni encouraged early installers to check their Google+ version by clicking on the gear icon on the top left of their app's homescreen and looking above the help button.

For those who downloaded the older version, Soni advised them to is uninstall the app and reinstall it by clicking here.

In any event, the refreshed + iPhone app is working well after TechCrunch and others found some early bugs.

The program allows users to publish updates to their Google+ Stream and see the links, pictures and updates posted to the service by folks in their Circles. Users may also manage those Circles.

Similar to the location-sharing feature in Google Buzz, the mobile version also lets users view public posts from other Google+ users located nearby. Just as with the Android + app, the iPhone + app includes the Huddle group messaging feature.

However, iPhone users can't enjoy the Instant Upload feature, which lets Android phone users automatically shuttle photos they take on their smartphones to Google+. The app also does not work for the iPod touch.

The arrival of the Google+ iPhone app so soon after the original service launch is a breath of fresh air for iPhone users.

Due to competitive politics, Apple delayed releases of native Google mobile apps, such as Google Voice, Google Goggles and Google Latitude for months before agreeing to publish them. Apple eventually loosened the reins on its App Store development rules and procedures to allow the apps.

COMMENTARY:   Below is everything you need to know to download the Google+ client app for the iPhone, Android and other brand smartphnes.

The Google+ Project For Mobile

Real-life sharing rethought for the web, wherever you are. Watch a video  Want Google+ for mobile? Visit this URL in your phone's browser:  m.google.com/plus

Send to Phone

Click thumbnail to see larger image

Features

• Huddle

  

  Why make group plans, one person at a time? Huddle lets you turn multiple conversations into one simple group chat.

• Instant Upload for Android

  

  Upload every video and picture to your own private album in the cloud. From there, just edit and share them with whoever you want.

• Circles

  

  You can choose to share some things with college buddies, others with parents, and almost nothing with your boss; just like in real-life.

• Stream

  

  Get updates from your Circles or from people nearby. Instantly discover whats going on in any neighborhood you're in.

Supported Phones

Availability	Android™	iPhone®	Blackberry®*	Nokia™	Windows® Mobile*
Native app	2.1+  Android	iOS 4+ App Store		X	X
Web app - access google.com/+ in your browser	1.5+	iOS 3+/iPad	6.0+

*Some platforms may only support the basic XHTML site.

SMS Texting

If you have a SMS enabled device, you can subscribe to SMS notifications or use SMS for posting to Huddle. Just go to the SMS account settings page to enable SMS*.

*Standard message and data rates from your carrier may apply.

Courtesy of an article dated July 20, 2011 appearing eWeek.com 

SOCIAL TV MARKETING ON TRACK FOR $12 BILLION BY 2020?

I attended the Social TV Summit in Los Angeles yesterday. (Actually, it was held at the Bel Air Country Club, but that's another story.) As the summit's title suggests, it was a day spent listening and talking about how social media is intersecting, enhancing and altering television viewing, media and advertising. It was a great conference and hit a hot topic at exactly the right time.

Noted media economist and co-host Jack Myers grabbed everyone's attention with his opening remarks, boldly predicting that social TV marketing would be an $8 billion to 12  billion annual market by 2020. While I haven't fully gotten my head around those numbers yet, Jack is a good friend and has been extraordinarily accurate in his macro market projections over the years, so I'm inclined to believe them, particularly when you consider them within the context of the $40 billion to 50 billion annually which he has previously forecast for all of social media marketing by 2020.

Where will all of this money come from? Here are some of my thoughts:

First, what is social TV? While I don't think you can really nail down a great definition of social TV at this point, since it's so nascent, I view it as all of the activity occurring at the intersection of social media and television devices and programming. It includes second screens used while watching TV, networked companion devices that support or relate to TV, social tools and applications on connected TVs, and all of the TV-related content and conversations on social media.

TV viewing plus Web and social use is big. Users spend an enormous amount of time surfing the web while watching TV. 78% of users do both at least monthly, and one-third of all Web browsing occurs in front of a TV.

Companion device usage while watching TV is big, too. 35% of tablet and iPad usage occurs in front of the television, and this is before we really have that many robust and specialized applications to truly enhance or support better TV viewing experiences. Many (including me) predict that app-enabled iPhones, tablets and iPads will be the dominant "remote controls" for home television in a few years.

Strong measurable linkage between TV viewing and social media expressions. Companies like Blue Fin and TrendRR are doing incredible things bringing Web-like Big Data crunching visualization to TV-related social expressions. Now, marketers and their agencies can know exactly what and how many social expressions their TV ad impressions generate.

Lots of new TV-related social tool. Check-in tools have become big in location based services. Similar tools are now available for TV viewing. Services like GetGlue and Miso are helping TV networks and programmers establish loyalty-based relationships with their viewers, enabling them to "check-in" while viewing, earn badges and even get show stickers sent to them in the mail.

Will this add up to $12 billion annually in nine years? I don't know, but I do think that it's going to be really big. What do you think? 

COMMENTARY:  Turns out that June 2011 was the top month for social TV.

The most social shows on TV aren’t necessarily those with the highest Nielsen ratings. That’s the big takeaway from a new research study from TVGuide.com, which ranks the most social TV shows from the 2010-2011 television season.

When we look at TV ratings, it’s almost always in the context of what programs have the most viewers. Historically, this is a useful metric for advertisers, but as traditional television viewership (and even ownership) continues to decline, it’s more important to track users’ engagement with programming, especially across social sites.

The rankings, which are based on TVGuide.com episode checkins, Facebook Likes and site comments, offer an interesting look at not only what shows are most social, but also how viewers really use social media to interact and engage with their favorite shows.

---

Top 10 Most Social Shows of the 2010-2011 TV Season

---

1. NCIS
2. American Idol
3. Criminal Minds
4. Glee
5. House
6. Fringe
7. Bones
8. Castle
9. Smallville
10. Law & Order: Special Victims Unit

Although some of these shows, like NCIS and American Idol, are also extremely popular in the Nielsen ratings, that isn’t the overall rule. Programs like Glee, which have huge social media followings and a great web presence, barely rank in Nielsen’s Top 40.

Smallville, a program that is wrapping up its tenth and final season, has a tremendously strong social fanbase, despite being one of Nielsen’s lowest rated programs.

---

How Users Engage With Social TV

---

Beyond simply looking at which TV shows are most social, TVGuide.com also researched how viewers use social TV. In the past 12 months, we’ve seen a wave of second-screen experience apps appear for devices like the iPad, encouraging users to engage with social media while watching the show live.

According to TVGuide.com, Twitter leads Facebook when it comes to engagement while a show is airing. Fifty percent of users said they tweet about the show they are watching, compared with only 35% who said they post to Facebook.

Christy Tanner, general manager and executive vice president of TV Guide Digital, will discuss the TVGuide.com report at Mashable Connect Friday in her presentation, “The Truth About Social TV.”

Courtesy of an article dated June 22, 2011 appearing in MediaPost Publications Online SPIN and an article dated May 13, 2011 appearing in Mashable

BIKE FIXTATION: THE BIKE REPAIR VENDING MACHINE THAT SELLS PARTS, TOOLS AND SNACKS

Say goodbye to bike shops. Minneapolis's Bike Fixtation will sell you the parts you need to get your bike back on the road, and give you the tools to make your repairs right there.

It's happened to every biker. A flat tire in an inconvenient place on your commute, and the nearest bike shop is a long walk away. Most casual bikers don't carry extra tubes or tools with them; and so any repair work on the road can mean an end to a bike ride, and potentially leaving your bike locked up somewhere slowly rusting as you forget about it in your frustration. That's why the idea of the Bike Fixtation is so brilliant: a place for you to buy new parts and then install them yourself.

The Fixtation is really just a vending machine, but with bike parts instead of snacks (though there are some snacks in case you're getting hungry on your ride). What makes it most convenient is the bike mount and tools--attached with aircraft cables to prevent theft--alongside the vending machine. You can replace that flat or adjust your brakes yourself without dealing with the characters who usually are employed at bike shops. Of course, you may not know how to replace a popped tube yourself; now is certainly the time to learn, so you can take full advantage of the Fixtation when it moves into your city.

Sadly, right now, only one Fixtation exists in the world, and it's in the bike-friendly Minneapolis (though a second one is also in the works in the city, and Times Up! operates one in--where else--Brooklyn). You can contact Fixtation to buy a unit, but until the company expands more broadly, bikers everywhere else will have to wait jealously for the company to take off enough to expand and give them their own Fixtations.

COMMENTARY:    I used to cycle a lot, but knee issues have made biking very painful for me. I can't tell you how many times I had bike repair problems, most of them flats, but it would've been nice to just replace the inner tube instead of trying to find the hole and patch it, out in the middle of nowhere or in 90 degree heat.  Having a Bike Fixtation vending machine closeby is a great convenience, but it will have to be strategically located on or close to bike trails  or where there are a lot of bike riders.  Lakes, state and national parks, major bike trails and so forth.   I can definitely see a Bike Fixtation in Portland, Oregon, one of the bike riding Mecca's of America.  San Francisco's Golden Gate Park, New York's Central Park, all the great parks where there are lots of bike riders. Or how about mass transit terminals. Lots of riders take their bikes on board trains like BART.  If you live up there or ever cycled there, you know what I mean. 

Kory Northrop, a grad student at the University of Oregon, produced this map that shows the Top 10 Major US Cities for bicycle communiting.  Minneapolis, MN and Portland are both on the map.

There is also a Top 50 US Biking Cities.  All of them would be great opportunities for Bike Fixtation.

2010 was a recovery year for the U.S. bicycle industry, with direct effect sales growing nearly 15% from 2009.

The U.S. bicycle industry generated $6 billion in sales in 2010, including retail sales of bicycles, related parts and accessories, through all channels of distribution.

The size of the industry has remained remarkably stable since 2003, with sales between $5.8 billion and $6.1 billion each year (the exception being 2009). For comparison purposes, we project the industry at $5.3 billion in 2002, $5.4 billion in 2003, $5.8 billion in 2004, $6.1 billion in 2005 (an all-time high), $5.8 billion in 2006, $6.0 billion in 2007, $6.0 billion in 2008, $5.6 billion in 2009, and $6 billion in 2010.

The approximately 4,200 specialty bicycle retailers commanded approximately 14% of the bicycle market in terms of unit sales in 2010, but 44% of the dollars, a dominant dollar share. Dealer price points generally start at around $200, with the average at $524, though prices can range into the thousands. While the number of specialty bicycle stores has declined in recent years due to consolidation, they are responsible for approximately the same amount of business through these fewer (but larger) stores today. This is the only distribution channel that maintained or increased average retail bicycle selling price in recent years. This channel's overall share was slightly down in 2010 compared to 2009 in new bicycle sales. It should be noted that new bicycle sales represent about 40% of the revenue for the average specialty bicycle retailer, with parts, accessories, service/repair, rentals and fitness equipment sales comprising the rest. Specialty bicycle retailers as a group feature quality merchandise, and add value through services such as bike fitting, assembly, repair, and community involvement.

Bicycle unit sales (for all bicycles, and for those with 20-in. wheels and above) for the U.S., including both the dealer and mass merchant channels are as follows. Please note that these figures reflect market consumption based on import statistics and estimates of domestic production. They do not account for inventory at the retail and wholesale levels.

I just visited the Bike Fixtation website, and they now have two locations in Minneapolis, MN.  This has the potential to become a great franchise idea.  Here's their contact information.

Mailing address:

Bike Fixtation LLC

5413 Nicollet Ave. S. #124

Minneapolis, MN 55419

Phone: 612-568-3498 (or 612-568-FIXT)

E-mail: [email protected]

Returns and Refunds

If you buy a bicycle component from us and it does not work, please contact us within 30 days of purchase for a Return Merchandise Authorization (RMA) number. After you get an RMA number, you can mail the item to us and we will either replace it with the same or a similar item of the same value, or refund the cost to you.

Courtesy of an article dated July 22, 2011 appearing in Fast Company