#the majority of public services get funding based on a combination of limited private donations and public funding that's based on the | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

rickhorrow · 5 years

Text

10 TO WATCH : MAYOR’S EDITION 81919

RICK HORROW’S TOP 10 SPORTS/BIZ/TECH/PHILANTHROPY ISSUES FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 19 : MAYOR’S EDITION

with Jacob Aere

Jay-Z and the NFL partner on entertainment content and social activism. The NFL is partnering with Jay-Z in a deal that "will put him in charge of managing some entertainment options for the league and will tie into the sport's social justice endeavors," according to the Washington Post and other sources. Jay-Z’s Roc Nation agency will become a co-producer of the Super Bowl halftime show, but the deal "does not contain a provision for him to be the halftime performer." Roc Nation "will choose entertainers who will perform in NFL content throughout the season." Jay-Z said that he "believes that Roc Nation will have the freedom" to produce the "kind of entertainment that it wants." The community activism portion of the partnership "will be tied into the NFL’s existing 'Inspire Change' program with its players.” While Jay-Z faced many questions surrounding his alignment with the NFL while Colin Kaepernick – who Carter has supported quite vocally – remains unemployed, as Carter rightly pointed out, his involvement will likely direct a lot more money to social justice issues. This is a huge win for the NFL, and the potentially positive impact of Jay-Z being willing to join forces with the league — especially now — cannot be overstated.

The LPGA and Group1001 announce a new official LPGA Tour event coming to Boca Raton, Florida in January, 2020. The first edition of the Gainbridge LPGA at Boca Rio will be held January 20-26 at Boca Rio Golf Club. The event will feature a 108-player field competing for a $2 million purse over 72 holes of stroke play. Boca Rio Golf Club, founded in 1967 and designed by Robert von Hagge, is situated four miles from the Atlantic Ocean on 200 acres of native Florida wilderness with no developed real estate. “We are thrilled to support women’s professional golf and to provide a platform for the sport’s best to compete and showcase their talents,” said Dan Towriss, Group1001 CEO. The new event will be one of two LPGA Tour tournaments held in Florida in January. The year will kick off with the Diamond Resorts Tournament of Champions January 15-19 in Lake Buena Vista, one week prior to the Gainbridge LPGA at Boca Rio.

With television revenue rolling in, Power 5 schools are engaged in a new kind of arms race, paying significantly more money than ever before to coaches in so-called non-revenue sports. USA Today examined how much money each Power 5 public school paid its head coaches in 23 sports other than football and men's and women's basketball 2013-2018. In that five-year span, total compensation for those coaches grew 43%, almost the same rate of increase as that of football coaches (51%). In 2005, D-I schools spent more on scholarships than on coaches and administrative pay. Since then, the latter have pulled ahead. In 2005, $736 million was spent on scholarships, $721 million on coaches’ pay, and $686 million on administrative pay. By 2018, $1.92 billion was going to coaches’ pay, $1.72 billion to administrative pay, and $1.7 billion to athlete scholarships. That “compensation for coaches in lower-profile, money-losing sports has been growing at a similar rate to football raises red flags for some athletics directors worried about budget crunches.” It also raises red flags for NCAA critics, who look at skyrocketing salaries in non-revenue sports alongside unpaid student-athletes and see a broken system.

The completion of a $315 million renovation has transformed the 96-year-old Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum from "ravaged to ravishing," according to the Los Angeles Times. The "wide concourse and new concession stands are welcome, and the views from the 1923 Club on the rooftop are dazzling." Every fan will "benefit from enhancements made during the two-year process." Every seat in the stadium is "new and wider and is equipped with a cupholder." Capacity will be 77,500, down from 92,348. Signs on the tunnels were "added to help fans find newly numbered seats, and new video boards and more than 600 TV screens will make it easy to follow games." There will be "more concession stands and the restrooms will continue to undergo improvement during the season." The Times noted 21 of 22 suites at the Coliseum have been sold at prices that ranged from $7.5-10 million with a "commitment of 20 years.” The renovated building will be a much more desirable destination for Trojans fans for years to come, and for Rams fans in their final season before the new Los Angeles Stadium at Hollywood Park opens next year.

It’s back to school time, and in Washington DC, Monumental and EVERFI support STEM. As students across the nation are returning to the classroom, Monumental Sports & Entertainment Founder and Chairman Ted Leonsis is "spearheading a multipronged effort to improve schools and fuel economic growth in the impoverished neighborhoods" around Entertainment & Sports Arena in DC's Ward 8. According to the Washington Times, the initiative, called "Forward8," includes "pushing for the expansion of advanced science, technology, engineering and mathematics" programs in DC schools. Monumental’s Beltway neighbor, education technology leader EVERFI, is likewise proactive in community engagement, empowering more teachers, citizens, and students to get involved with game-based, incentive driven online education that fosters greater comprehension, retention, and behavior change. By bringing together the public and private sectors to change the way education is delivered, EVERFI is equipping today’s learners across the nation with the skills they need to become tomorrow’s leaders, while Monumental is leading the way toward helping improve education, the workforce of tomorrow, and the community in their own backyard.

Formula One has recorded a modest year-on-year rise in revenues for the second financial quarter of 2019, going from $585 million in 2018 to $620 million in its latest financial filing. Operating income rose from $14 million to $26 million over the same period, according to SportsPro. The global motor sport series’ ten teams also saw an increase in their combined payments between April and June from $307 million to $335 million, with the figure directly linked to the overall revenue increase. Formula One’s owners Liberty Media in a statement further explained the overall change in revenues: “Broadcast revenue increased primarily due to contractual rate increases. Advertising and sponsorship revenue increased due to revenue from new sponsorship agreements entered into beginning in the second half of 2018. Other Formula One revenue decreased in the second quarter primarily due to the mix of races, which resulted in lower TV production and Paddock Club revenue.” Formula One CEO Chase Carey also told investors that Liberty Media is making "good headway" in its moves to add a second race in the U.S. Miami and Las Vegas remain the two potential landing cities.

Nike launches first shoe subscription service, two years in the making. According to Fast Company, the retail giant launched the Nike Adventure Club, which sends a pair of Nike or Converse kicks to kids at regular intervals. Club members can receive them on a monthly, bimonthly, or quarterly basis. Each pair of shoes works out to $50-$60 a pair — which puts the service on the higher end of the kids’ sneaker market. What’s more, when a child grows out of a pair or they get worn out, you can send shoes back — either in the Adventure Club box or by requesting a prepaid shoe bag — to the company, and even include non-Nike shoes you want to get rid of. If a shoe is in good condition, Nike will donate it to a nonprofit. But if it has reached the end of its life, Nike will recycle it through its Grind program, which breaks down athletic footwear to turn it into other products, including running tracks and playgrounds. Because of this, Nike is pitching the program as a way to make kid’s shoes sustainable.

Louisiana state commission approves bond sale for Superdome upgrades. Louisiana's State Bond Commission has given the Mercedes-Benz Superdome's governing body the "go-ahead" to sell up to $350 million in bonds to "fund its stadium upgrade project," according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune. The approval is a "major step" for the venue's $450 million makeover. It comes after committee members quizzed Saints President Dennis Lauscha and SMG Executive Vice President of Stadiums and Arenas Doug Thornton about "why the spending was needed and how much the state of Louisiana would have to contribute." Thornton said that they "had studied alternatives for more than two years, including various renovations as well as building an entirely new stadium." Even though the Superdome received $336 million worth of upgrades in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and before it hosted Super Bowl XLVII in 2013, the new upgrades are needed to keep the building competitive based on NFL benchmarks and new stadiums nationwide competing for Super Bowls and other mega events. By 2025, the end of the Saints' current lease, the Superdome is projected to have a total fiscal impact of $19.9 billion.

The Cleveland Browns open up training camp and help puppies find homes. According to The Athletic, more and more NFL teams are limiting public access to training camp, but the Browns are doing the opposite. The team has expanded camp over the past few years to make it more fan- and family-friendly and has added several sets of large bleachers, food trucks and beer stands, and games for kids and teens. The highlight of the training camp is Browns Puppy Pound, which adopts out puppies from the Northeast Ohio SPCA during every open practice. More than 110 dogs have been adopted thus far in training camp this year and more than 450 puppies have been adopted through the partnership since the Puppy Pound debuted in 2015. By bringing the dogs to a place where people are happy to be going, the Browns have helped nearly 500 dogs find homes.

The annual Gagne-Bergeron Pro-Am raised over $450,000 for children’s charities in the Boston area. The event took place on August 8 and featured 10,000 fans in attendance to watch the annual charity hockey game. Now in its 11th year, the event has funneled $2 million to charity since its inception. Notable names who participated in this year’s event includes Paul Stansy as a representative of Golden Knights on the ice. According to Le Journal de Quebec, Philippe Boucher Foundation, the Maurice Tanguay Foundation and the Simple Plan Foundation will benefit from the money raised at the event which included the participation of 21 NHL players and other amateur players at the Videotron Center in Quebec. Hockey is a close-knit community and by bringing together notable names in the off-season, fans stay engaged with players while also helping those in need.

#10 #10towatch

0 notes

szunwaves · 4 years

Text

DAO is really a good match for DeFi. Will continuous organization function as range of traditional organizations? -Blockchain news

Decentralized autonomous businesses are too subversive and never suitable for traditional organizations or businesses, and an identical continuous organization (CO) model works extremely well by organizations like Airbnb. Original title: "DeFi+DAO is really a perfect match, how about continuous organization (CO)? 》 Published by: hibauld Favre, CEO of Fairmint The recent outbreak of DeFi projects has attracted the attention of several people. Like Chris Burniske, a partner of a well-known investment institution Placeholder, commented that "DeFi has more effect on Ethereum than ICO. " But the truth is that ETH has not The explosion of DeFi has captured lots of value, that is clearly not much like the impact of ICO in 17 years, and the newest argument believes that the mixture of DeFi+DAO can certainly trigger an ICO-like effect. Although the notion of DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) is quite disruptive, it is actually not suitable for traditional organizations or businesses, and a continuing organization (CO) model like the concept can theoretically be something such as Airbnb Utilized by organizations in the digital economy to bring many very beneficial features to all stakeholders in the era of digital economy, but it will even involve relevant securities laws. In this specific article, we shall introduce the concepts of Continuous Organization (CO), Continuous Securities Issuance (CSO), and Decentralized Autonomous Trust (DAT).

The digital economy has basically changed the type of the connection between clients and enterprises. Today's individuals have transformed from passive consumers to crucial value creation forces, whether through their actual work (such as Airbnb, Uber, Apple App Store, Amazon Marketplace, and so on ) or through their data (such as Facebook, Google) Wait). By using the work of users, businesses in the digital economy are able to create products and services with personalized user experience to keep increasing returns on scale, thereby providing investors with huge returns on investment. Unfortunately, today's businesses do not have a simple and effective way to closely combine the interests of users with the financial success of the organization. This really is due primarily to restrictions and frictions imposed on non-qualified investors when attempting to sell and allocating securities under today's securities law. To be able to solve this dilemma, we've proposed a brand new paradigm: Continuous Organization (CO), which is really a new kind of organization made to coordinate the interests of stakeholders better than traditional businesses. A sustainable organization describes a company that establishes a continuing securities issuance (CSO) by transferring part or all its realized income to a decentralized autonomous trust (DAT). DAT is really a smart contract that uses predefined rules to automatically issue, repurchase, and destroy all-digital securities called fair securities (FAIRs) to meet up market demand. Generally speaking, continuous organization (CO) brings very beneficial features to all stakeholders, such as:

* The founder can buy a simple and effective fund acquisition mechanism, and at exactly the same time closely integrate the community and the financial success of the project, so as to create a strong network effect without affecting organizational governance. * In a great way, employees transform illiquid commodity in to inalienable liquid and fair securities, to ensure that their interests are certainly aligned with the interests of the organization. * Early investors got the advantages they deserved once the organization was successful, without fretting about being over-diluted in a bigger round of financing. * The organization's users, clients, suppliers, and partners can invest in the organization in a less frictional and less permissive way, to ensure that their interests are aligned with those of the organization. * As a result of "securities" nature of fair securities, regulators can better protect citizens from risky ICOs, while also being able to tax the income generated by ongoing businesses. * This environment advantages of the decoupling of governance and financial interests proposed by the sustainable organization model, which allows the founder and his organization to target more on long-term development. Obviously, as a result of "securities" nature of fair securities, this involves the issuer to conform to the securities laws of its jurisdiction. The background organization has evolved and adapted to the digital economy. As the world transitions from the industrial age to the digital age, the legal structure invented and optimized to meet up the business needs of the industrial age is now showing its limitations. Actually the digital economy has pushed organizations to adjust and transform their business practices, to ensure that its nature has completely changed:

But inspite of the tremendous changes in the organization, we still make use of the same kind of legal entity to use our business. These legal entities are designed to meet with the needs of industrial age businesses within the country. They're no longer applicable to the computing and network era, and in this era, businesses make use of the power of the masses to obtain more and more returns on scale, thereby blurring the boundaries between users and workers. For example: Uber drivers are both Uber users and Uber employees. Exactly the same is true for Airbnb hosts. A Facebook user can be a (unpaid) Facebook employee. The Rise of the Crowd Nicolas Colin succinctly described this example in his book "Hedging": "The key to understanding the digital economy is that it redistributes power from the within of the organization to the exterior. The inference with this law is that the businesses that succeed in the digital economy are those organizations that realize how exactly to redistribute power away from organization and learn to use it. It's to market growth and profit. ” To define the type with this power, Nicolas Colin defined the thought of "multitude" in a book co-authored with Henri Verdier: "The masses are defined as huge amounts of individuals. They're now designed with increasingly powerful devices and so are connected to one another through a wide network. " In the digital economy, businesses rely on the masses (ie "Uber drivers", "Airbnb hosts", "Apple app developers", "Facebook users") as a business to flourish, however the masses build a fortune at the organizational level There is no vested interest. Instead, many people enter the "gig economy, " that is part-time work that gets paid after successfully completing something. These jobs were once rare in the industrial age, but now they're becoming more prevalent. New challenges The radical transformation of businesses in the digital economy has taken major challenges to all stakeholders, and these should be addressed: For the founder: "How can I inspire my community to market the long-term success of the organization? " The clear answer is money. In the digital economy, the masses have grown to be an important part of the organization's workforce, and founders need new mechanisms to attract, retain, and empower diverse worldwide communities. Many marketing strategies already exist, but none of them will make the interests of the organization and the community maintain a lasting and firm consistency. In line with the current securities law, the real solution (selling and/or distributing securities to the masses) is legally so complicated that it's not a realistic option. "Airbnb is really a community-based company. Without our landlord, we would did nothing. We would like our most loyal landlord to be a shareholder, but these policies have to be changed to achieve this goal. " The above mentioned paragraph is what Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky mentioned in a comment letter from Airbnb to the SEC. (Note: Demonstrably, the SEC did not agree to this point. Even though Airbnb has not yet gone bankrupt, it really is already in danger) "How can I build a long-term trust relationship with my community? " The clear answer is trust. To be able to form a lasting and stable alliance with the public, the organization has to win the trust of the public. But as increasing numbers of people understand how the investment capital (VC) model works, it is now increasingly problematic for businesses supported by VCs to get the trust of the community. Actually before investors needed liquidity, the interests of investment capital organizations were only aligned with the interests of the organization. When investors demand liquidity, the consistency of interest is suddenly concentrated in an exceedingly small amount of time. Investors desire to sell their stocks at the best possible price. Generally, founders will be severely diluted and lose get a handle on of the organization, so that they cannot do much to create different results. For employees: "For the risks I simply take, I'd like an economic reunite proportional to the worthiness I create. " The clear answer is fair value creation capture. Unlike investors in a diversified portfolio, employees aren't diversified. They only get income from the organization in which they work. There are lots of plans to align the interests of employees with the financial success of the organization, but most plans provide illiquid and transferable conditional securities or securities options. Insufficient mobility in private businesses results in that employees are forced to leave lots of value if they leave the organization (they donate to value creation). For the masses: "I hope I could get financial rewards from the organization through contributions. " The clear answer is long-term wealth accumulation and economic security. When communities (whether users, workers, partners, suppliers, clients... ) love something or service given by a company, they hope that they can receive financial rewards for their positive contributions to the merchandise and so are helping the organization Accumulate long-term wealth along the way of growth. But there are only so advantages of one-time recommendation, coupons, and so on What people want is money! This is especially true in the present context. For investors: "I hope that the risks I simply take can get the best profits on return. " The clear answer may be the highest profits on return. What investors want is obviously a very important factor: in order to offer their shares at the best valuation. Investors' dependence on governance comes only from the truth that their investment lacks liquidity, plus they need governance to protect it until a liquidity event occurs. As long as they could sell their shares at the best price if they see fit, investors will be happy. When there is no liquidity, VC investment is similar to a home run game, that's, finding an investment that will bring extraordinary returns and overcompensating most under-performing investments. For regulators: "I desire to help innovators, protect investors, and collect the taxes I deserve. " Regulators (usually) make an effort to provide innovators with a regulatory framework to help them create new services. An integral part of this regulatory framework is to help innovators raise funds, while providing investors with reasonable legal protections to avoid misconduct. Ahead of the digital economy era, this plan will create huge returns through taxation. Unfortunately for regulators, the digital economy makes taxation more challenging: "The digital economy systematically separates commercial and consumer locations. Consequently, it really is increasingly difficult to ascertain where the worthiness developed by this economy is located, which is increasingly difficult to utilize the now outdated tax laws. " —— Pierre Collin & Nicolas Colin For the earth: "What I need is an organization that will think long-term. " Establishing a motivation mechanism so that the organization can optimize for a long time while being in charge of environmentally friendly impact, that is very advantageous to mankind all together. Currently, we're struggling to begin a globally enforceable governance mechanism on environmental issues and the short-term behavior of today's financial markets, helping to make the tragedy of the commons more real. The emergence and issues of ICO Recently, the rise of cryptocurrency has given birth to a brand new approach to organizational financing-Initial Coin Offering (ICO). The businesses doing these activities more or less used the following publicity practices: "We have created a fixed quantity of tokens on the blockchain. These tokens aren't securities because we shall not give investors any financial or voting rights. But you can expect these tokens to have future value because we design Something, it will have the cattle X function, we're attempting to sell a degree of tokens to finance the development of the project, these tokens will undoubtedly be flowing in the market, we will be on line on the XX exchange, don't miss it This opportunity... " On top, ICO seems to coordinate the interests of the main stakeholders in the organization perfectly. Like the founders raised lots of funds without giving any governance rights so they can pursue their very own vision. Investors may also be very happy that they can cash out quickly once the coins are launched on the exchange. This early liquidity allows them to dramatically reduce risks, of course, provided there is certainly adequate liquidity. Employees can be very happy since they can get liquidity tokens and cash out. Nevertheless the problem is: for those inexperienced investors, it's very difficult to judge the worthiness of the tokens. Consequently, many retail investors are harvested by some projects that promise super high returns. Actually in many projects, the risks associated with project investment are an order of magnitude higher than the potential returns. Listed below are the main risks involved with ICO:

* Could be the team correctly motivated to create the merchandise? In many projects, the founders have remaining numerous tokens for themselves, and there is no or almost no lock-up time. For that reason if the ICO works, the founders will instantly become rich and might lose the true creation of the merchandise. power. * Can the team create products and services? Projects are usually in early stages and there are no products and services to showcase, but only the good vision described in the white paper. * Can the merchandise be created on the planned schedule? Many project parties have seriously underestimated the major technical limitations brought by the integration of the blockchain with the tokens in the system. * Does the merchandise have a good user experience? Most projects completely underestimate the UX constraints of integrating tokens into the system. * If the product is delivered, might it be used? It is difficult to learn perhaps the team is capable of a product/market match. * If users like this product, will the token capture any value? There could be cases where some projects are extremely successful, but their tokens have no value since it just isn't a security. * If the token is valuable, might it be a good investment target? You realize, most projects sell their tokens at very high valuations. For the above reasons, most ICO projects will fail, and they are not good investment targets. To make matters worse, a project is extremely successful, but its tokens have no value. This raises two crucial issues:

* Retail investors will be deceived as a result of how a Shitcoin waterfall works in the ICO; * Regulators do not know dealing with ICOs. On usually the one hand, they welcome innovations that attract talent and investors, but however, they don't like retail investors being deceived. The very fact before us is that the vast majority of ICOs in the marketplace are scams. Continuous organization (CO) Continuous organization describes any organization that establishes continuous securities issuance (CSO), whose purpose is to enable each stakeholder to purchase the organization at any time. Continuous Securities Issuance (CSO) Continuous Securities Issuance (CSO) is really a novel way for businesses to have financing without releasing any equity or any governance rights. The CSO uses the realized income of the organization as collateral to support fully digital securities (called fair securities) that anybody can purchase or sell, to speculate on the organization's future income. To be able to create a continuous securities offering (CSO), a company will agree to work with a fixed percentage of its realized income to produce a valuable collateral in just a pre-defined minimum time period. Specifically, that is accomplished by injecting the above fixed percentage of income into the Decentralized Autonomous Trust (DAT). DAT is really a smart contract that works on the token joint curve contract to automatically issue and repurchase fair securities to meet up industry needs of investors. Essential notes about currencies that interact with DAT: In the following example, we use ETH because the currency to interact with DAT. ETH may be the native currency of Ethereum, but this doesn't mean that users must use ETH to interact with DAT. Actually we can also replace ETH with stable currencies (such as DAI or USDC) to eradicate the impact of volatility. Understanding the Token Joint Curve Model Since Simon De La Rouvière first proposed the joint curve model in 2017, lots of people have already been exploring this notion. The joint curve contract is really a special kind of smart contract that issues a unique tokens through the purchase and sell function. To buy tokens, the client sends ETH to the Buy function, which calculates the average ETH price of the tokens, and Send you the proper amount. The Sell function works in the contrary way. The contract will calculate the present average selling price and send you the proper ETH amount. When it comes to a continuing organization (CO), the buying and selling functions will vary:

The token joint curve model has interesting features, including:

* Unlimited supply, there is no limit to how many tokens which can be minted; * Deterministic price calculation, the buying and selling price of tokens increases or decreases with how many tokens minted; * Guaranteed in full instant liquidity, the joint curve contract may be the counterparty of the transaction, also it always holds enough Ether reserves to purchase right back tokens. For that reason tokens are available and sold immediately at any time, and the joint curve is similar to an automatic market maker. * Continuous price, the price tag on token n is leaner than token n+1 and higher than token n-1. It takes a specific amount to calculate how many tokens minted with a given quantity of ETH (or how many ETH came ultimately back with a given quantity of tokens) Understanding of built-in learning. It is worth noting that in the joint curve model, the x-axis represents how many tokens issued. For a simple example, assume that B(x)=x and s(x)=0. The price C of the first 10 tokens purchased is distributed by the curved surface between your buying curve and the attempting to sell curve, which can be expressed because the following formula:

For that reason inside our example, C=10*10/2=50. Decentralized Autonomous Trust (DAT) In the context of continuous organization (CO), we introduce a joint curve predicated on income: one joint curve using two different functions, one for the buying curve and one other for attempting to sell Curves: B (buy) and S (sell).

Decentralized autonomous trust joint curve for issuing fair securities (FAIRs) These fair securities will represent the claim to DAT cash reserves. You will need to remember that, unlike stocks, Fair Securities doesn't represent ownership of the organization, it only has financial rights to the cash reserves managed by DAT. The cash reserve of DAT is really a function of the organization's income. For that reason by purchasing fair securities, investors can buy financial experience of the organization's future income. Function B defines the price tag on investing in a fair security from DAT. B is really a linear function with a positive slope b such that B(x)=b*x, where b> 0. The slope b could be opted for arbitrarily, the bigger b is, the more the worthiness of the machine token is, conversely, the reduced the b is, the less the worthiness of the machine token is. If you want your investors to have a large amount of tokens, select a tiny b value (such as 1x10^(-9)). The big event S defines the price tag on DAT repurchasing fair securities. S can be a linear function and it has a slope s such that S (x) = s * x, where s> 0. But in a continuing organization (CO), the worthiness of s changes with time. To be able to illustrate how a value of s changes with time, you should understand how DAT receives and processes the cash it receives. Investment-buy() function The initial source of DAT cash flow is investors who want to invest in sustainable businesses. They do that by calling DAT's buy() function. Whenever an "external" investor sends funds to DAT, DAT deposits some of the cash in DAT's cash reserve, and the residual funds are utilized in the organization's wallet. We call I the percentage of funds in the cash reserve, and this I is really a constant constant. Value flow once the investment occurs Effect on the DAT joint curve contract once the investment occurs Investors who buy fair securities are to purchase basic businesses. Investors usually do not want their money to be retained by DAT. They want their money to be utilized by the organization. For that reason the worthiness of s should be an order of magnitude below b, Meaning that the worthiness of I will be low under ideal circumstances. If the characteristics of the organization (income, growth... ) could be proven, I could even be zero. For example: Suppose an investor sends 10 ETH to DAT. If I=10%, DAT will transfer 9 ETH to the organization's wallet and keep 1 ETH in its cash reserves. If the investor is really a beneficiary organization, that's, the organization technically invests alone, the above rules usually do not apply. In that case, I is obviously corresponding to 100%, meaning whenever a company invests in its DAT, 100% of the organization's funds used to get fair securities will flow into the repurchase reserve. To learn more, see Fair Securities Purchase by Beneficiary Organizations below. calculus When an investor purchases fair securities at cost c, that he receives x units of fair securities, where x equals:

Where c may be the quantity of fair securities used to get, b may be the sales slope, and a may be the quantity of fair securities which were in blood supply prior to the transaction. Fair securities purchased by the beneficiary organization-buy() At any time, the beneficiary organization can end up buying fair securities. That is why, the beneficiary organization calls the buy() function like other investors, but unlike external investors, 100% of the funds employed by the beneficiary organization to get fair securities flow into the repurchase Reserve (that is, once the funds result from the beneficiary organization, the contribution rate I is corresponding to 100%). This helps to ensure that the interests of investors are fully aligned. Actually if the beneficiary organization can purchase fair securities at exactly the same investment ratio I as external investors, this will specifically mean that the beneficiary organization can purchase fair securities at a lower life expectancy price than external investors (because by definition, The corporation received (1-I)% of the investment. This big difference can certainly be abused by dishonest businesses and managers. Buying fair securities can be a means for businesses to reward fair securities holders. Actually once the beneficiary organization purchases fair securities, it not only increases the repurchase reserve, but also increases the slope of the sales curve (see details below). For that reason for a company with off-chain income, buying fair securities may be the organization's means of actually channeling its income to DAT. Which means that the more revenue a company generates, the more fair securities it accumulates with time, which can be used to further motivate its key stakeholders. Obviously, if the organization wants to maximize the rewards of fair securities holders, additionally, it may simply decide to burn off its fair securities with the burn() function. Value flow once the beneficiary organization buys fair securities The impact of beneficiary organizations' purchase of fair securities on the joint curve The big difference between your investment of external investors and the purchase of fair securities by the beneficiary organization is derived from their respective contribution ratios to the DAT reserve: External investor's investment: The total amount M contributes I * M to the DAT reserve and at exactly the same time creates the equivalent value of M. For that reason the contribution rate of (I*M)/M=I and I therefore

For example: suppose I=10%, s0=0. 1, b=1, suppose an investor buys the first 10 tokens at a high price of 50 ETH, then DAT now has a reserve of 50x10% = 5 ETH, and, the beneficiary organization pays 1 The price tag on ETH produces 0. 0995 tokens, and s1=0. 1176. For that reason since s1> s0, this operation increases the value of fair security holders, that's, investors are now able to sell at a higher price than before Its fair securities. Burn up Fair Securities-burn() Holders of fair securities can burn off their fair securities at any time by calling the burn() function. Technically, burning fair securities wont destroy them (the total supply remains the same), but it can ensure that no one can use them, to ensure that their marginal value could be redistributed equally to other fair securities holders. For investors, that is meaningless, however the beneficiary organization has reasons to do this, such as (1) it will not use these fair securities, or (2) if it wants to boost the equity of other fair securities holders. Value, then destruction is meaningful.

Investment-sell() function Investors can decide to sell their fair securities at any time to get ETH right back. They do that by calling the sell() function. When DAT receives fair securities, it's going to burn off the received fair securities and send ETH back once again to investors in line with the function S. The slope s of S increases discretely with time with each payment received by DAT. The ETH came ultimately back to investors is drawn from the DAT "repurchase" cash reserve, that will not affect the organization's funds. The worthiness flow that develops when fair securities can be bought The impact of investors attempting to sell tokens on the DAT joint curve contract Calculus involved When an investor sells x fair securities, assuming that he's not burned fair securities before, he'll get an amount c, that is corresponding to:

Where s may be the attempting to sell slope and a may be the fair quantity of securities in blood supply prior to the transaction. When it comes to fair securities being burned, the calculus becomes:

Where x'is the fair quantity of securities burned. Income-pay() Persistent businesses can directly perceive customer payments through DAT by calling its pay() function. Whenever DAT receives payment P, a small part of the received payment visits cash reserves. We call D (for distribution) the percentage of income from the inflow cash reserve, and d may be the corresponding element of income (d=P*D). The complete amount d is kept in DAT's cash reserves, thereby increasing the worthiness of fair securities. It ought to be noted that calling the pay() function will even trigger the issuance of new fair securities, and how many issuances is corresponding to how many fair securities created when buy (d) is named. Automatically, these newly created fair securities are delivered to the organization, as shown in the following figure: The worthiness flow once the ongoing organization relies on DAT for payments Instead, the consumer can specify a parameter of the pay() function to send the newly created fair securities to the address of his choice (most likely his wallet address). In cases like this, the worthiness flow can be as follows: Value flow once the customer specifies the wallet address Example: Assuming D=5%, if the ongoing organization receives a payment of 100 ETH, 5 ETH will flow into the "repurchase" cash reserve, thereby increasing the collective value of fair securities. Note: For a few continuous businesses (for example, organizations that not need a basic legal entity), it makes sense for payments from clients (that is, income from the continuous organization) directly through DAT. It ought to be noted that the income of the organization doesn't of necessity need to be realized through DAT, because the organization may also decide to reward fair security holders only through fair security purchases. For businesses that have already started business, they're probably be more prepared to first receive payments from clients in fiat currency, and transfer a small part of their perceived income to DAT to boost the worthiness of fair securities, as shown in the following figure:

In this way, DAT is wholly invisible to clients (the user experience has not changed), and the organization won't have to modify any highly optimized sales processes. Pre-mine fair securities pool When DAT is established (once the DAT is established, the principles are immutable), the organization can decide to "pre-mine" some fair securities for it self, meaning it really is different from the zero-based DAT fair securities. Pre-mining fair securities is frequently of great significance to businesses, whether it is rewarding founders, paying early employees, rewarding early users or providing liquidity pools for the secondary market. But you should realize that pre-mining fair securities will even have potential costs, because these "free" pre-mining fair securities represent the sales pressure of DAT, plus they usually do not provide any "repurchase" cash reserves for DAT. Contribution. Technically speaking, which means that the more fair security tokens pre-mined, the reduced the attempting to sell curve (that is, the slope of s defined earlier). For that reason specifically, if a company decides to mint a lot of fair securities when setting up DAT, it may have to be very careful, because if it wants to dig an excessive amount of, it may have a significant negative effect on investors' risks and financial returns influences. Beneath the same conditions, the impact of pre-mining tokens For that reason being an organization, you might have good reasons to pre-dig some fair securities, but be mindful, because an excessive amount of digging wil dramatically reduce the attractiveness of fair securities to investors. For that reason a good rule is: before income is generated, only the required fair securities have to be cast beforehand. Once the income continues to come in, the organization increases the worthiness of the fair securities by channeling its income to DAT. summary Persistent organization (CO) describes a company that issues fair securities through CSO, which transfers part or all the realized income to a certain kind of smart contract called a decentralized autonomous trust (DAT). These fair securities represent the best to claim the present and future cash reserves of DAT, and permit investors to trade on the organization's revenue growth. In that design, businesses, investors, and potential prospects interact by sending ETH or fair securities to DAT:

Initialization of the life span cycle of continuous securities issuance The first stage of the CSO is specific since it doesn't make use of the joint curve. Actually to begin the CSO, the beneficiary organization has to set the very least financing goal (MFG), that is the amount of investment needed to start the joint curve. All investors who participated in the investment before attaining the minimum financing target (using the buy() function) will obtain fair securities at exactly the same average price, as shown in the following figure: The first stage of CSO Before attaining the minimum financing target, all funds are in custody, and investors can decide to withdraw their investment at any time (by calling the sell () function), and can receive 100% of the investment funds. Once the minimum financing target is reached, the joint curve begins. A small part of the minimum financing target will be injected into the cash reserve, and the residual funds will be utilized in the beneficiary organization. In addition , before attaining the minimum financing target, the beneficiary organization can unilaterally decide to cancel the CSO. In cases like this, investors can withdraw 100% of the investment funds. It ought to be noted that after the minimum financing target is reached, the organization can't cancel the CSO. Similarly, after attaining the minimum financing target, with the launch of the joint curve, investors cannot withdraw their funds. They are able to only now Call the sell() function, and its operation can be as described in the earlier section. This minimum financing target mechanism protects investors and businesses at exactly the same time, but it ought to be noted that the organization must not set the minimum financing target too much, otherwise it's going to cause the CSO to be converted into a simple crowdfunding campaign and make The objective of the CSO has failed. Delivery The CSO can carry on indefinitely, but it may also decide to terminate, and the beneficiary organization can decide to close it at any time following the minimum period expires. To be able to provide investors with some necessary visibility, the beneficiary organization must guarantee the minimum operating time of its CSO (for example, 36 months, 5 years, 10 years... ). Next minimum time, the organization is absolve to choose whether to close the CSO. In addition , at any time, a company can boost the minimum time it promises to help keep its CSO running. Obviously, closing the CSO just isn't free. To close the CSO, the beneficiary organization must pay an exit fee. The exit fee price is corresponding to the present issuance (buy) price of fair securities multiplied by how many outstanding FAIR. Once the exit fee is paid, the organization can close its CSO to ensure that every investor can sell their fair securities at exactly the same price: the present buying price. Visualization of the exit cost needed to close the CSO Doing so ensures that the last investor wont lose or earn profits, while the early investors are expected to reach profitability (this is clearly not guaranteed, because the last issue price just isn't of necessity the best price). The purchase price big difference between your problematic buying and selling curves in the secondary market also leaves room for fair securities transactions in the secondary market. If the price tag on a newly minted fair security is 10, investors would rather choose the minted fair security from other low-price channels. Demonstrably, the secondary market will be restricted by the dynamic cost range stipulated by DAT: it really is unreasonable for buyers to bid higher than the present price proposed by DAT. Similarly, the purchase price requested by owner is leaner compared to price proposed by DAT, which doesn't sound right.

Interestingly, the recent rise of automatic market makers (such as Uniswap or Kyber) in the secondary market ensures that the main market (DAT) and the secondary market could be completely built-in from the perspective of user experience, that is given by Fairmint An attribute that's essential for reducing price fluctuations and maximizing investor returns. The benefits of continuous organization (CO) In contrast to traditional businesses, continuous organization provides advantages for many stakeholders. For the founder:

* Begin a solid incentive mechanism to produce the community; * It is more straightforward to recruit talents all over the world; * Maintain long-term get a handle on of the organization; * Make your business more resistant to business fluctuations; * Less distraction (legal, fundraising), more focus on execution; * Obtain personal liquidity; for employees:

* Align your personal economic interests with the interests of the organization; * When you feel suitable, it is possible to decide to sell your fair securities; for the masses:

#axie infinity #etheroll #how to earn bitcoins without mining #earn bitcoin playing games

0 notes

deniscollins · 5 years

Text

Drug Giants Close In on a $50 Billion Settlement of Opioid Cases

AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health and McKesson Corporation, which together distribute about 90 percent of the country’s medicines, along with Johnson & Johnson and Teva, face a rapidly growing list of more than 2,300 lawsuits in state and federal courts due to the nation’s opioid epidemic, which has led to 400,000 deaths in the U.S. over the past two decades. Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the trial starting Monday have said that the distributors conspired through their trade organization to flout the federal law, which obliged them to monitor sales and report outliers. They said that the distributors not only cast a blind eye on extraordinary orders, but lashed and rewarded their teams to sell greater volumes of opioids. If you were an executive at one of the five companies, would you: (1) go to court and defend yourself or (2) agree to support a settlement of nearly $50 billion in cash and addiction treatments to be exempt from the lawsuits? Why? What are the ethics underlying your decision?

The nation’s three largest drug distributors and two manufacturers have agreed with multiple states on a framework to resolve thousands of opioid cases with a settlement worth nearly $50 billion in cash and addiction treatments, according to three people familiar with the negotiations.

The agreement would release AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health and McKesson Corporation, which together distribute about 90 percent of the country’s medicines, along with Johnson & Johnson and Teva, the Israel-based manufacturer of generic drugs, from a rapidly growing list of more than 2,300 lawsuits that they face in federal and state courts.

Although the states have agreed in principle to the framework, cities and counties across the country have not yet fully embraced it, said lawyers for a committee that represents thousands of municipal governments. They are seeking more information about how the money will be distributed, whether it will be directed to relief measures or end up in general funds for state legislatures, and “when they could expect the financial support to start,” the lawyers said in a statement.

All the parties are under extreme pressure to reach a deal by Monday, when opening statements are set to begin in Cleveland in the first federal trial to determine responsibility for the opioid epidemic, which has led to 400,000 deaths in the United States over the past two decades.

Some of the largest drugmakers, pharmacy chains and distributors have been fighting with state and local governments in the courts for nearly two years, as the nation searches for accountability for one of the worst public health crises in America’s history.

The three drug distributors and Teva are defendants in the first trial, brought by two Ohio counties. With thousands of similar governmental lawsuits on the national runway, the Ohio suit is considered an important showcase that will test the strength of both sides’ witnesses and legal arguments before 12 jurors.

The drug distributors are not nearly as well known as some of the other corporate players implicated in the opioid crisis, like Purdue Pharma, whose misleading marketing of the drug OxyContin is thought to have set off the epidemic. But the distributors are bigger and richer than the manufacturers — all three are among the top 20 companies in the United States by revenue — and numerous lawsuits have pointed to evidence that they routinely evaded regulators and helped pharmacies and manufacturers circumvent limits on orders of opioid painkillers.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the trial starting Monday have said that the distributors conspired through their trade organization to flout the federal law, which obliged them to monitor sales and report outliers. They said that the distributors not only cast a blind eye on extraordinary orders, but lashed and rewarded their teams to sell greater volumes of opioids.

In New York State alone, the distributors sold 1.6 billion oxycodone pills to pharmacies between 2010 and 2018. It was distributors, said the office of Attorney General Letitia James of New York, who “jammed open the floodgates.”

The companies either did not respond to messages or declined to comment. The distributors have said they were simply delivering medication that was approved by the Food and Drug Administration and prescribed by doctors.

Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas are leading the settlement talks for the states, along with lawyers for thousands of cities and counties whose cases are in federal court.

According to people familiar with the talks, the combined value of the deal breaks down as follows: $20 billion to $25 billion in cash to be divided among the states and localities to help pay for health care, law enforcement and other costs associated with the epidemic; and another $25 billion to $30 billion in addiction-treatment drugs, supplies and delivery services.

Many details are still being debated, including the timetable for when the money would be paid, people familiar with the negotiations said. Some state and local governments wanted more details about how the companies calculated the total dollar figures on services and addiction-treatment drugs.

Whether the amount will be considered sufficient by all the plaintiffs remains to be seen. A new report by the Society of Actuaries projects that the costs related to the opioid epidemic — including health care, child and family assistance programs, criminal justice activities and lost wages — will hit $188 billion in 2019 alone.

“It’s not an accident these offers are coming out on the eve of trial,” said Abbe R. Gluck, a professor of health policy and law at Yale Law School. “But I think the question will be if this number is going to be enough to get a sufficient number of local governments to sign on.”

People familiar with the talks said that one sticking point in the negotiations is how much money will go toward attorneys’ fees for the private lawyers who represent governments in the overwhelming majority of cases and work on contingency.

Those lawyers filed the first opioid lawsuits in 2014 and have since conducted hundreds of depositions and compiled many millions of documents.

This proposed deal is considerably larger than the tentative settlement negotiated by Purdue Pharma earlier this fall, not least because it involves five large companies instead of one. Under the Purdue agreement, Purdue’s owners, members of the Sackler family, would pay between $3 billion and $4.5 billion over seven years. The company would be restructured into a public corporation, with profits from drug sales going toward the plaintiffs. Purdue has also agreed to donate addiction-treatment medication.

The Purdue deal is being vigorously opposed by about two dozen states who contend that the Sacklers are not paying enough money and have not yet fully disclosed how much they have earned from OxyContin sales.

Johnson & Johnson recently settled with the two Ohio counties for about $20.4 million, but the company is named in many of the other suits, as well.

Many drug manufacturers and pharmacy chains also have been named as defendants in federal and state opioids cases, but they are apparently not involved in these negotiations.

On Wednesday, even as negotiations continued, jury selection was underway in the federal courthouse in Cleveland. Because the trial is expected to be heavily steeped in testimony about illegal drug use, addiction, crime and rehab, prospective jurors were interviewed in private in Judge Dan A. Polster’s chambers, so that lawyers could determine whether they had a glancing acquaintance with any of those topics.

The atmosphere in the courtroom was solemn and portentous, with lawyers proceeding exactly as if the trial will indeed begin on Monday, should talks collapse.

#Opioids

0 notes

biofunmy · 5 years

Text

Drug Giants Close In on a $50 Billion Settlement of Opioid Cases

CLEVELAND — The nation’s three largest drug distributors and two manufacturers have agreed with multiple states on a framework to resolve thousands of opioid cases with a settlement worth nearly $50 billion in cash and addiction treatments, according to three people familiar with the negotiations.

Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas are leading the settlement talks for the states, along with lawyers for thousands of cities and counties whose cases are in federal court.

Those lawyers filed the first opioid lawsuits in 2014 and have since conducted hundreds of depositions and compiled many millions of documents.

Johnson & Johnson recently settled with the two Ohio counties for about $20.4 million, but the company is named in many of the other suits, as well.

Many drug manufacturers and pharmacy chains also have been named as defendants in federal and state opioids cases, but they are apparently not involved in these negotiations.

The atmosphere in the courtroom was solemn and portentous, with lawyers proceeding exactly as if the trial will indeed begin on Monday, should talks collapse.

Sahred From Source link Health

from WordPress http://bit.ly/2nXzMEw via IFTTT

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

vennomax · 6 years

Text

Is Africa the new face of rising wealth and opulence?

New Post has been published on http://www.vennomax.com/africa/is-africa-the-new-face-of-rising-wealth-and-opulence/

Is Africa the new face of rising wealth and opulence?

Not many people in Africa, the majority of whom can hardly afford more than one meal a day, know of the existence of the Maldives, an island in the Indian Ocean. Yet, the island nation, a popular holiday destination for the rich and famous, is the hotspot for African holidaymakers taking a breather away from home

One such visitor is Heshan de Silva, a young millionaire from Kenya. “The Maldives is my favorite holiday destination. I go there every year,” he says. He is not the only African millionaire who vacations in the Maldives. Today, the number of trendy Africans vacationing on the breath-taking and enormously expensive beaches of the Maldives is on the rise. For years, only globetrotters from Europe and the US flocked there.

Mr. de Silva, the founder of The de Silva Group, a private equity firm, represents the emerging face of a fast-increasing culture of opulence seen in African capitals amidst sprawling poverty. Like some of his compatriots, he feels the disconcerting inequality contrast, a gap that he tries to narrow through social enterprise. Mr. de Silva symbolizes the successful new African, with class, luxury and affluence. Apart from holidaying in Maldives, he drives high-end cars and owns homes in Kenya, South Africa, the US and Sri Lanka.

Evidence that opulence has found a new home in Africa can be seen across the continent. According to New World Wealth, a consultancy based in the UK and South Africa, there are about 165,000 very wealthy individuals in Africa with a combined net wealth holdings of more than $660 billion. This equates to roughly 28% of total individual wealth held on the continent. From 2000 to 2013, Africa’s very wealthy individuals increased by more than 150% compared to the worldwide growth rate of 73%. In 2013, South Africa topped the list with 48,800 dollar millionaires, followed by Egypt with 23,000, Nigeria with 15,900 and Kenya with 9,000.

The significant rise in the number of dollar millionaires has not been among the usual African economic giants alone.

Millionaires doubled

Surprisingly, Ethiopia, a country that for long has been the face of Africa’s afflictions owing to the devastating famine of 1984, is creating more millionaires at a faster pace than other African countries. Ranked among the top ten fastest growing economies in the world, Ethiopia more than doubled its dollar millionaires from 1,300 in 2007 to 2,700 in 2014.

As the number of dollar millionaires in Africa increases, global companies in the luxury and fashion industry are entering the new consumer markets. In the recent past, sports car maker Porsche, French luxury goods conglomerates LVMH and Louis Vuitton, Italian fashion and leather goods brand Gucci and Danish jewelry brand Pandora, among others, have set up shop in several African countries.

For these companies, Africa falls under the category of dynamic markets that are offering exciting opportunities with higher returns on investments than mature markets in Europe and North America.

With a billion-strong young population and an economy expected to double from $2 trillion to $4 trillion before 2025, the continent has emerged as the next frontier for growth and opportunity. “Africa is no longer that continent the world viewed with pity. Today Africa is generating wealth and the world now sees opportunities,” notes Lyal White, the director of the Centre for Dynamic Markets at the Gordon Institute of Business Science at South Africa’s University of Pretoria.

This observation is supported by Michael Musau, the Chief Executive of Emerging Africa Capital, a wealth management firm based in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi. “Poverty is still deeply rooted in Africa but the continent is changing,” he says.

Africa’s millionaires are amassing massive wealth from lucrative sectors like telecoms, financial services, retail, manufacturing, imports and exports, agriculture and commodities. At the same time, the continent seems to be losing the income equality battle. In fact, the New World Wealth research shows the gap is widening as the number of millionaires is growing at a faster rate than the middle class.

Inequality in Africa is a malady that is widening at alarming levels and continues to paint the ‘Africa Rising’ narrative with shades of black. Africa is the second most inequitable region in the world, hosting six out of the 10 most unequal countries worldwide. “Inequality makes us ask the question, ‘Is Africa rising or is the world floundering?’” says Mr. White.

The growing number of millionaires seeking avenues to invest their wealth is a testament that a fast-growing elite has high disposable income being spent not only on luxury goods and affluent lifestyles, but also on business investments. “There is a significant increase in the number of [millionaires] in Africa and most are looking for areas to invest,” explains Mr. Musau, adding that Africa’s millionaires are investing heavily in various sectors through private equities, hedge funds and capital markets.

Despite the public displays of wealth, the presence of 58 million undernourished and stunted African children below the age of five, high levels of child and maternal mortality and limited access to clean water and sanitation, health and education facilities has forced the rich to give back some of their wealth by creating jobs and engaging in philanthropic initiatives.

“It is consciously disturbing to be rich while surrounded by poverty and do nothing,” says Mr. de Silva, adding that his company has a social arm that focuses on offering start-up enterprises interest-free loans.

Riches versus philanthropy

On the larger scale, Africa’s billionaires have borrowed a cue from some of the world’s richest people like Bill Gates and set up foundations through which they channel millions of dollars in philanthropy. Aliko Dangote, the Nigerian founder of Africa’s biggest industrial conglomerate, Dangote Group, recently announced he would donate $1.2 billion to the Dangote Foundation to scale up support in education, health and youth empowerment. Patrice Motsepe, a South African mining magnate with a net worth of about $2.5 billion, has committed to give at least half of the funds generated from his family’s assets to improve the lives of poor and marginalised South Africans.

Despite the contrasting realities in Africa, the global luxury and fashion industry cannot ignore the continent in its pursuit for profits and growth. According to Bain & Company, the world’s leading advisor to the global luxury goods industry, the industry has entered a territory that can well be described as the “new normal” because leading markets in Europe, Russia, Americas, Japan, China and Asia Pacific are floundering and growth can only be guaranteed by new markets.

Market intelligence firm Euromonitor International adds that although Africa is a long way behind both emerging Asia and Latin America in terms of the size of its middle class, the combination of rapidly growing economies and youthful populations augur well for the next ten years and beyond for the luxury industry. It also reckons that recent spate of oil and gas discoveries in some African countries could fuel get-rich-quick opportunities for a new generation of millionaires, which translates into a growing market for the luxury industry. Erratic oil prices, like the recent plunge, however, pose real threats particularly for countries that are highly dependent on a single resource such as Nigeria, Angola and South Sudan.

Africa’s luxury market, valued at $4 billion, is still a fraction compared to the $280 billion global value. Nonetheless, the continent will be the second driver of growth over the next decade after the Middle East.

#African millionaires

0 notes