MBS Blog

 

 

This article is from one of our favorite bloggers: Mike Hewitt provides the “big picture” of individual nations relative to the global economy.  The picture is not pretty for many.

http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/dollardaze/2008/1205.html

 

 

The extreme level of public debt in developed nations in particular…and these charts don’t measure corporate and private debt…portend an almost certain re-alignment of economic power.  China for example, can be compared to the United States at the beginning of the 20^th century. The United States is now like post World War II Britain. It may never fully recover.

The  result of the changes is the full emergence of transition economies.  Unburdened by massive debt, with growth oriented economies that have incorporated  free market mechanisms,  emerging market economies could  take the lead a lot faster than previously reckoned. Indeed, that may be the “silver lining” in the current economic cloud.

 

 

Technorati Tags: China, United States, World War II, Britain, www.dollardaze.org, Mike Hewitt, Wealth of Nations, debt, transition economies, emerging markets, corporate debt, private debt, Anton Olff, Intermational Monetary Fund, IMF, G-7, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada, government liabilities, Foreign Reserves, Sovereign Wealth Funds, United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, Dubai Workd, Singapore, Temasek Holdings, Norway, Government Pension Fund of Norway, Kuwait, Kuwait Investment Authority, China, China Investment Corporation, Australia, Australian Government Future Fund, Qatar, Qatar Investment Authority, Libya, Libya Investment Authority, Alaska Permanent Fund, Brunei, Brunei Investment Agency, South Korea, Korea Investment Corporation, Kazakhstan, Kazakhstan National Fund, Chile, Copper Stabilization Fund, Russia, Russian National Wealth Fund, Malaysia, Khazanah Nasional, Canada, Alberta Heritage Fund, Taiwan, National Stabilization Fund, Bahrain, Bahrain Mumtalakat Holding Company, Iran, Oil Stabilization Fund, Oman, State General Reserve Fund, Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia Sovereign Wealth Fund, foreign reserve holdings, India, Brazil, Algeria, Mexico, Switzerland, Turkey, Hong Kong, Poland, Nigeria, Indonesia, Argentina, Romania, Venezuela, Netherlands, Spain, CIA,

The Age of Anarchy has begun! No…I am not referring to modern terrorism, or the collapse of governments, riots in the streets, or the current “global financial crisis”-though many of these modern events reflect the changes that began in the 20^th century, and are rapidly evolving in the 21^st.  The Age of Anarchy is about the end of the systems and structures that we have known for centuries, if not thousands of years.  

Anarchy is a dirty word. It implies chaos, lack of order, and an uncertain future. As security seeking organisms, we crave a degree of predictability or what we could define as stability in our lives. The question is: when has there ever been a period-other than for short intervals-when this “stability” was the long term norm in any society or civilization? Has the world stayed the same in the last decade? How about in the last twenty years? How about during the lifespan of any individual?

The Age of Anarchy is a measure of the changes that have already occurred, and those that are occurring as you read this. It is:

1.     A rational and self-motivated decoupling of individuals from the current framework-or the matrix of society-into new formations, groups, associations, alliances and relationships. It is not just about the destruction of the old, but rather the overlay of the new on top as new structures are reformed in its wake.  

2.    More creation and destruction of ideas and institutions, and in more rapid fashion.

3.    Flexible power structures that are constantly shifting. These can be governments, corporations, or other “centers” of power. Essentially, the center will never remain static.

4.    Benefits will be more narrowly defined. More importantly, they will be understood or at least available for analysis as transparency will be the byproduct.

5.     Alternative networks will co-exist and in some places, will dominate pre-existing established networks.

6.    The “chaos” will facilitate more ideas, energy, trade, and individual wealth. However, it will also cause greater envy and a backlash from those unable to participate or those on the sidelines…and there are always people who are shut out. This will cause countervailing power structures that will attempt to constrain ‘The Age of Anarchy” in the name of…stability and security.

This is no Francis Fukuyama, “The End of History” thesis . On the contrary-history is just moving on.  

The Age of Anarchy is the collapse of the Old World, its institutions, and the belief systems that were its foundations.

The Age of Anarchy is not some dystopian world full of bomb throwing dreamers…though they will no doubt play a role just as they have in every age…but rather a world where the individual is sovereign, with the power…aided by increasing knowledge and technological power to maintain that sovereignty not by laws, or rights or promises from governments, but by their own means. It is a world where people trade with each other directly, with little interference from intermediaries other than the facilitators who provide the platforms for this evolving trade.

Technology is the means.  The democratization and ever decreasing cost of it, are what is driving “The Age of Anarchy.”

 

This article from www.cafebabel.com, is an example of how this age is being ushered in, and old structures are rapidly being replaced:

 

In Europe internet is in, TV is out

 

 

Television audiences are diminishing, yet consumers have never been as interested in new content which is switching from one screen to another

TF1, the biggest commercial television channel in France, is having a crisis: the famous eight o’clock news, a veritable institution, has dipped below the symbolic bar of 30% of the market share. For decades, the televised evening news has been THE meeting-point for the large majority of French families. This drop in viewing could just be an anecdote that will be told in better times, but in reality it reveals a change in viewer habits which is well underway. It also hints at related, newer economic models (public revenue).

I watch what I want

Throughout Europe, viewers are faced with a plethora of TV channels. Audiences are diminishing because of the increased division of viewing. We have never before watched so much media, but the trend is now to watch à la carte: I-watch-what-I-want-when-I-want-and-not-what-and-when-it-is-imposed-on-me. So, all the big terrestrial channels are following this trend and proposing or plan to propose online ‘catch up TV’ to allow viewers to watch their favourite programme or series when they choose.

 

I watch what I want when I want and not what and when it is imposed on me

In the United States, the TiVo system has become very popular. It lets you record programmes and watch them later, even allowing you to flick past the ads. Along the same lines, Video On Demand (VOD) is taking off at great speed throughout Europe, and its catalogues are getting thicker each day. The European Audiovisual Observatory counted no fewer than 250 VOD services in Europe at the end of 2007, one hundred more than the previous year.

TF1 blames Youtube

For the first time in decades, young people are watching less and less television, in favour of the internet (chat, social networking, blogs) and mobile phones. 30% of young people aged eight to fourteen years use the computer at the same time as watching TV. Rather than putting on MTV, you only have to go on Youtube to find music videos. Video broadcast sites have become quite important in the last few years. Youtube, the French-based Dailymotion and co. represent more than a third of the global bandwidth on the web.

In a single year traditional channels have lost 10% of their audience in the 15 to 34 year old age range. Attempts to curb this phenomenon have resulted in the first complaint: TF1 has attacked Dailymotion and Youtube, claiming compensation to the value of 100 million euros. Others have tried to come to agreements, like Canal Plus and Dailymotion. The TF1 group has launched its own online TV service, called Wat TV, to compete with the giants of online video. Another method is Catch up TV: a web site on which the internet surfer can watch TV programmes at any time, in order to adapt to these new media viewing trends.

Tracking viewers

So is the internet the future for TV viewing? In any case, that is the bet that Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom are taking. They are famous on the net for having developed Skype and Kazaa, while creating their platform Joost. Joost is an application based on a ‘peer to peer’ system, which allows you to view audiovisual content. The interface allows a high level of interactivity, giving the user the choice of numerous TV programmes and also allowing them to create playlists or even to participate in the programmes by posting comments or voting.

 

The era of the washing powder company inundating our screens with messages has passed

Interestingly for users, the system allows advertisers to create targeted ads (using the viewing habits and surfing history of the user), and to closely track users (from the moment they see the ad until they go onto the site of the seller). The era of the washing powder company inundating our screens with messages has passed. In the future, they may only be targeting those who are likely to be interested in their product, which will reduce costs and increase the efficiency of their campaigns.

Endless personalisation

Joost merited a huge success since the moment of its launch in May 2007 to the release of its beta version in September 2007. But since then, audiences have not taken off and competitors have emerged: for example,Hulu in August 2007. News Corp and NBC’s Youtube rival (which of course benefits from the content of these shareholders), has targeted audiences which are beginning to strongly attract advertisers. One could also give the example of the combined initiative of Intel and Yahoo to offer new internet applications viewable on your living room TV screen in August 2008. The idea is to display superimposed, personalised widgets over the images on the screen (little windows which deliver information like weather, traffic conditions, TV programmes, and so on).

So, TV as we know it is evolving into a mix of classic television and internet: the interface will resemble that of a traditional TV with more diverse windows of information coming from multiple sources, including a variety of communities which the spectator can join and which can be endlessly personalised.

Anton Olff

Technorati Tags: Age or Anarchy, riots, endless personalization, Hulu, News Corp, NBC, Yahoo, Intel, global financial crisis, terrorism, 20th century, 21st century, security, society, stability, civilization, individuals, relationships, power structures, centers of power, alternative networks, Frances Fukuyama, The End of History, Old World, sovereign individual, platforms, technology, democratization, cafebabe.com, new economic models, television, TF1, France, internet, United States, TiVo, Video on Demand, VOD, European Audiovisual Observatory, chat, social networking, blogs, MTV, Youtube, Dailymotion, bandwidth, Canal Plus, Wat TV, Skype, Kazaa, Joost, peer to peer,

We have all heard the “war stories.”  Sit at any pub, club, bar or cafe in Ukraine where ex-pats congregate, and the topic of conversation will eventually turn to the difficulty in getting things done here.  The inevitable comparsions between how easy things are accomplished in the United States, the U.K. compared with Ukraine begets the question: “why are you here then?”

Of course, we know the reasons.  We are here to make  money, and lots of it.

Here is the attraction: excellent geographic location between Europe and Russia, a developing market with a population the size of France,  rising incomes, burgeoning consumer demand, and a seemingly less anti-business regulatory and tax environment than the mature economies of the United States and Western Europe.

That all sounds great. So why is so difficult? Why do businessmen, particularly foreign businessmen feel like they are pioneers or as one American real estate developer said to me, “like one of those characters in the HBO TV series Deadwood.”  Yes indeed!! Here are the top reasons, in no particular order.

1. Corruption- you always pay…and then pay some more…and everyone has their hand out.
2. The Government- or should we say, lack thereof. The rules change on a daily basis.
3. Business Culture- not exactly Western, not exactly Soviet. The customer is wrong!!!
4. Work Ethic- more for less…work that is. I get my salary whether I do a good job or bad job.
5. Bureaucracy- you always need one more paper or permit…but the office is closed today.
6. Transparency- you always find out afterwards. Information is seldom volunteered.
7. Punctuality- are you kidding? Ukrainians rarely show up on time for meetings.
8. Contract Negotiation- signed, sealed, delivered…and then undone. Just when you think you are ready to move forward, the contract needs to be renegotiated. Of course, you are the one who must “negotiate.”
9. Visibility- you want to be noticed. You want your product and services to be recognized …but you have to be discreet too.
10. Bias- not xenophobia on the part of Ukrainians which can certainly be a factor, but more importantly the bias of foreigners. Ukraine is not, and may never be an easy place to conduct business. Hard to accept. Even harder to deal with, but a fact unlikely to change.

Anton Olff

Technorati Tags: Asia, Bias, Bureaucracy, Business Culture, Contract Negotiation, corruption, Europe, France, mature economies, Punctuality, Russia, Soviet, tax environment, The Government, Transparency, U.K., ukraine, United States, Visibility, Western Europe, Work Ethic