Yesterday, Colorado's state legislature finalized a bill to increase the state's renewable energy standard to 30 percent by 2020.
Colorado was one of the first states to adopt a renewable energy standard at all, committing in 2004 to get 10 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2015 and increasing that to 20 percent by 2020 in 2006. This latest measure puts the state right behind California, who has the highest standard at 33 percent by 2020.
The bill also requires utilities to get 3 percent of their electricity from distributed sources like rooftop solar and other smaller wind and solar installations in order to give a boost to local renewable energy and construction companies. That requirement alone will be responsible for 1 GW of clean energy, save 6.8 billion gallons of water and reduce emissions by 30 million tons of CO2 a year.
via Climate Progress
Bidz.com (BIDZ), the online jewelery retailer, posted Q4 revenue of $27.5 million, below the Street at $30 million, and falling short of the company’s guidance range of $28 million to $32 million. The company posted a profit of a penny a share, at the low end of its guidance of 1-4 cents.
The company said results were hut by “unexpected difficulties” in implementing a Microsoft Dynamics AX ERP system.
For Q1, BIDZ sees revenue of $26 million to $28 million, with gross margin of 24%-26%, down from 29.6% in the fourth quarter, “as the company will push for market share to get back on a growth curve.” The company expects to break-even in the quarter on a pre-tax basis. The Street has been expecting profits of a nickel a share.
In late trading, BIDZ is up 4 cents, at $2.19.
Deadbeat celebrity photographer Annie Leibovitz has a new debt collector to hide from: Art Capital Group, the artsharking operation to which Leibovitz had mortgaged her homes and photographs, has sold the debt to Colony Capital.
Leibovitz's saga of insolvency began in the fall of 2008, when she borrowed a total of $15 million from Art Capital Group, which specializes in loaning money to artists. In exchange for the loan, Leibovitz put up her homes in Greenwich Village and Rhinebeck, N.Y.—and the rights to every photograph she'd ever taken—as collateral. By last summer, she was in hock to Art Capital for a total of $24 million. She refinanced the debt last September after Art Capital sued her for failing to live up to her end of their deal, at which point it totaled $30 million, according to the New York Times.
In other words, Leibovitz doubled her already colossal debt in the course of one year, all while pulling down a reported $2 million annual salary from Vanity Fair and who knows how much from commercial work. So she seems like a good bet for a loan, right?
Now Colony Capital, a private equity firm that usually invests in real estate, has taken Leibovitz off of Art Capital's hands. According to the Financial Times, Colony—which also recently purchased the mortgage on Michael Jackson's Neverland ranch—will help Leibovitz wring money out of her library of photographs by selling signed prints and mounting touring exhibitions. That's precisely the same plan that Art Capital had, which—after nearly two years of trying—they failed to pull off. We can't figure out why Colony thinks they'll have better luck.
Apparently, what it takes to beat one IMAX 3D blockbuster from a well-respected director is another IMAX 3D blockbuster from a well-respected director. Tim Burton's Alice opened surprisingly strongly this weekend, knocking Avatar off the top of the international charts.
Cameron's colorful spectacular has been on top of the worldwide movie charts for the last 11 weeks, before this weekend's release of Disney's new Alice In Wonderland, which wasn't just the most successful opening weekend of a movie so far this year but, domestically, beat Avatar's opening weekend by more than $30 million. The movie grossed $210.3 million internationally, $116.3 million of which came from domestic audiences — despite poor reviews. Whether it'll end up having the legs to give Avatar's longevity a run for its money depends to be seen but, for now, consider this another victory for spectacle over substance.
Despite his reputation as the mainstream representation of the outcast, Tim Burton is no stranger to box office records. He more or less invented the modern opening weekend when Batman shattered all short-term records with $40.4 million in its opening sprint. He broke his own record three years later with Batman Returns, which opened with $45.6 million. At the time of its release (November 1999), Sleepy Hollow's $30 million debut was one of the largest R-rated openings on record. Two and a half years later, he would score $68.5 million with Planet of the Apes, which was the second-highest opening weekend at the time. Oh, and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory opened with $56.1 million in summer 2005. No records were broken, but at the time it was the fourth-biggest July debut and the second-biggest non-Harry Potter debut in Warner Bros history, behind The Matrix Reloaded ($91.7 million). Point being, when Burton makes something that people want to see, he's the most bankable director outside of the holy trinity of Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and James Cameron.
This weekend was another trip to the record books as Alice in Wonderland propelled to $116.3 million over its debut weekend. That's the sixth-biggest start ever, the biggest non-sequel ever (beating Spider-Man, which debuted to $114 million in 2002). It's the biggest 3D debut (besting Avatar's $77 million opening). Plus, it's the second-biggest non-summer opening of all time behind the $142 million debut of Twilight Saga: New Moon. With a surprisingly strong 2.8x multiplier, the picture debuted with a $41 million Friday and a $44.3 million Saturday (up 8%). The might of its first two days leads me to believe that Sunday, an estimated 30% drop to $30.9 million, was vastly underestimated (with the Oscars being the big unknown variable), so don't be too surprised if tomorrow's final numbers are even bigger. For Mr. Burton, this is the third time in just under twenty-one years that his film has broken the record for a non-sequel opening weekend (Batman, Planet of the Apes, and Alice in Wonderland).
This was the biggest debut of every actor involved saved for Mr. Johnny Depp. Johnny Depp now holds all three of the Mouse House's biggest opening weekends, with Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest ($135.6 million), Alice in Wonderland ($116.3 million), and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End ($114.7 million). The collaboration between Depp and Burton has certainly been a fruitful one. While Burton once had to beg the studios to let him cast his favorite actor, post-Curse of the Black Pearl the studios have been all-but demanding that the two of them work together. And, counting the $19 million wide-release debut of The Corpse Bride, four of Depp's ten best opening weekends have been Burton/Depp collaborations. For what it's worth, this is also Anne Hathaway's second $50 million+ debut in just three weeks.
Where the picture goes from here is anybody's guess. It's no secret that I rather disliked the film, and this massive debut certainly won't be good news to those who want Burton to make more original and/or just-plain better movies as his career enters its third act. Ironically, it certainly seems that, post-Sleepy Hallow (the beginning of Burton's second-act, recovering from the twin financial flops Ed Wood and Mars Attacks!), Tim Burton's opening weekends are inversely proportional to the quality of the respective film. Regardless, this will surely be Burton's third $200 million+ picture. It will likely out-gross Batman, which remains his top-grossing picture at $251.1 million (it only needs to do 2.1x its opening weekend to match that). $300 million is more of a question mark. I doubt that the general word-of-mouth will be as venomous as the harsher pans like mine, but I can't imagine that general audiences are going to be all-that enchanted beyond the surface level. Besides, it only keeps those precious 3D screens for three weeks, until Dreamworks' How to Train Your Dragon steals most of them away. As always, next weekend will tell the tale.
There isn't much other box office news, but let's press on regardless. Antoine Fuqua's gritty cop drama, Brooklyn's Finest, debuted with a strong second-place take of $13.5 million (the not-too-bad B-movie cost just $25 million). Antoine Fuqua is quickly becoming a consistent opener. His last several pictures all opened between $13 million and $17 million. Sure, sometimes they cost too much (King Arthur, Shooter), but if studios budget within expectations, Fuqua delivers the B-movie goods on a regular basis. Shooter has a special place in my heart for Danny Glover's inexplicable vocals alone. Ethan Hawke has just scored two of the three best openings of his career in just two months. I mentioned last weekend that Overture is quickly making itself into a studio to be reckoned with, and this is no exception. Oddly enough, this is the last release scheduled for the studio until the October release of Let Me In, which is the much-feared remake of Let the Right One In.
Overture is succeeding of late because they are offering adult-driven genre pictures, starring grownups and aimed at grownups, at a reasonable cost that belies the expectations of such fare. You won't find me defending Law-Abiding Citizen (and certainly not Righteous Kill) as great cinema, but there is a 'niche' market for old-fashioned genre movies (not films) starring adults and not aimed at fourteen-year old boys/girls. We all act amazed when Vantage Point or Lakeview Terrace (two Sony pictures) open well, but such pulpy fare is rare enough in this marketplace that they usually have the demos all to themselves on opening weekend. Most importantly, producers of said movies don't spend $80 million (cough-State of Play-cough) on these pictures and act SHOCKED when they only do about $40-60 million domestic. Adult, star-driven thrillers aren't dead, they just can't be budgeted like comic-book sequels.
Shutter Island fell another 41% in its third weekend, pulling in $13.3 million and ending its third weekend with $95 million. Cop Out became Kevin Smith's highest-grossing picture, with a whole $32 million by weekend three. Too bad no one likes it, but sometimes you hold your nose and do one 'for them'. Better luck next time. Avatar weathered the loss of its IMAX and 3D screens, as it dropped a sizable but survivable 43% in weekend 12. Still, the picture pulled in $7.7 million and now sits with $720 million. Earlier reports of its death were obviously exaggerated. The 3D version of the film could very well become a staple in theaters with multiple 3D auditoriums for a month or longer, especially if it triumphs at tonight's Academy Awards. Point being, I was wrong and Avatar's box office story is far from finished.
Crazy Heart banked on pre-Oscar hype and jumped 36% and it now sits at $29 million. If Jeff Bridges wins the Oscar, this thing could top $40 million. The Crazies fell an ok-for-horror 56% in weekend two. Valentine's Day now sits at $106 million. The Blind Side crossed the $250 million-mark. If Bullock wins an Oscar tonight (mazel tov on accepting that Razzie for All About Steve in person, by the way), it'll likely surpass Star Trek. Percy Jackson and the... this movie is too terrible to justify typing out the whole bloody title is at $78 million while The Wolfman just crossed $60 million.
Oh, and Roman Polanski's The Ghost Writer inches closer to the top-ten, as it grossed $1.3 million for thirteenth place. The Summit acquisition has now grossed $2.6 million. It makes me wish it were a better movie. Polanski, Scorsese, and Burton all whiffed this year. So far, only Martin Campbell delivered the promised goods. Edge of Darkness was at least a rock-solid B-genre picture with the maturity and seriousness of purpose (IE - the violence has weight and the characters act like adults) that makes me a fan. Let's hope that Chris Nolan also beats the current odds or all hope may be lost.
Anyway, join us next weekend for Paul Greengrass's The Green Zone (an Iraq-war thriller that's being sold like it's The Bourne Redundancy). Plus Paramount tries to convince us that Alice Eve is hotter and sexier than Krysten Ritter (HA!) with She's Out of My League. Lance Grass (who held his own against Angela Bassett in Tyler Perry's Meet the Browns) marries America Ferrera in Our Family Wedding. Oh, and Robert Pattinson tests his non-Twilight box office pull with the romantic drama, Remember Me. Until then, take care.
Headline at Drudge Report: Obama policies projected to add $9.7 trillion to debt by 2020... points to this story, National debt to be higher than White House forecast, CBO says,
President Obama's proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday. Proposed tax cuts for the middle class account for nearly a third of that shortfall.
So here is the deal. This Drudge headline, saying Obama's spending "adds to the deficit" is a trick. Here is how it works. Suppose you take over a company that is losing $100 million a year, and your jobs is to turn it around. So perhaps the second year the company only loses $70 million, $30 million the third year, and breaks even in year four. You saved the company. But in those years the company "lost" another $100 million. Should you be fired?
President Obama took office as President of a country with a $1.4 trillion deficit - thanks to the failure of conservative policies. Their tax cuts, wars, military buildups, corruption and incompetence drove the borrowing WAY up, and then their deregulation, corruption and incompetence destroyed the economy, driving the borrowing up into the stratosphere.
If the borrowing just stayed the same at the $1.4 trillion level Obama inherited each year -- never mind that interest on all that borrowing gets higher and higher each year -- that would mean $14 trillion would be added to the deficit by 2020. That's a LOT more than the $9.7 trillion that Drudge and the conservatives are making so much noise about. Obama is dramatically reducing the borrowing, but they use trickery to make it look like he is causing it.
What about that $1.4 trillion deficit? That was the deficit for the 20098 budget year. Conservatives say -- over and over -- that Obama "tripled the deficit" in 2009. This isn't even a trick, it is just a lie. The final Bush budget year ended with a deficit of $1.4 trillion. Conservatives have been telling the public this was an "Obama Deficit" and use graphics and charts that label this last Bush budget as Obama's. This is nothing more than a lie, of course repeated endlessly.
But what else should you expect? Like the scorpion that stings the frog as the frog ferries it across the river, it's what they do. They screw things up, and then point the finger of blame at everyone else.
This post originally appeared at Campaign for America's Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF.
(Reuters) Google said on its company blog on Friday that it has acquired San Francisco-based DocVerse. Terms of the deal were not disclosed.
“With DocVerse, people can begin to experience some of the benefits of web-based collaboration using the traditional Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint desktop applications,” Google Product Manager Jonathan Rochelle said in the blog post.
Google is trying to lure users to its Web-based productivity software, known as Google Docs, which competes with Microsoft’s dominant Office software package.
The DocVerse deal is Google’s second acquisition announcement this week, and represents the company’s fourth acquisition in less than four weeks.
San Francisco-based DocVerse was founded in 2007 by a pair of former Microsoft managers, according to its Web site.
According to a report in the AllThingsDigital blog, citing unnamed sources, the price of the deal was between $25 million and $30 million.
(Reporting by Alexei Oreskovic; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)
peHUB Note: DocVerse had raised $1.3 million in VC funding from firms like Baseline Ventures
Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.
UPDATE: Google confirmed the deal in a blog post, which you can read below.
Continuing its acquisition spree, Google has snapped up DocVerse, a start-up aimed at allowing users of Microsoft Office documents to collaborate in real-time on the Web, said several sources.
Sources said the price was in the $25 to $30 million range.
Founded by two ex-Microsoft (MSFT) execs in 2008, Shan Sinha and Alex DeNeui, San Francisco-based DocVerse has raised a small $1.3 million in venture funding from Baseline Ventures, Harrison Metal and Naval Ravikant.
It’s yet another shot across Microsoft’s software bow by Google (GOOG), along with a range of other digital arenas such as cloud computing and mapping.
Google has also been pushing its own cloud-based Google Docs, but it struggles against the Office juggernaut. Thus, a link with Office via DocVerse is a smart move.
For its part, Microsoft has committed itself to moving its hugely popular productivity suite–which includes Word, PowerPoint and Excel–into the clouds, in order to protect its software hegemony.
Why? Simultaneous group-editing and collaboration online is clearly the future of Office.
In fact, yesterday, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer made a significant statement related to cloud computing in a speech, noting, “This is the bet for the company. For the cloud, we’re all in.”
In an interesting side note, this is the third company that Harrison Metal has invested in that has been acquired by Google over the last several months. Other sales have included AdMob for $750 million and Aardvark for $50 million.
There had been a post in TechCrunch back in December that the deal was nearly done, but it was apparently not until now.
Here is the blog post on the deal from Google:
Google Docs welcomes DocVerse
Friday, March 05, 2010 at 10:48 AM
The future of productivity applications is in the cloud. We’ve always believed the web is the best platform for creating and sharing information, and Google Docs has already helped millions of people become more productive. But we recognize that many people are still accustomed to desktop software. So as we continue to improve Google Docs and Google Sites as rich collaboration tools, we’re also making it easier for people to transition to the cloud, and interoperate with desktop applications like Microsoft Office.
For example, we recently made it possible to use Google Docs to store and share any type of file that you have on your computer, not just the ones you create online. Today we’re excited to announce another step towards seamless interoperability: we have acquired DocVerse.DocVerse is a small, nimble team of talented developers who share our vision, and they’ve enabled true collaboration right within Microsoft Office. With DocVerse, people can begin to experience some of the benefits of web-based collaboration using the traditional Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint desktop applications.
A huge “welcome” to the DocVerse team and their customers! Current DocVerse users can keep using the product as usual, though we’ve suspended new sign-ups until we’re ready to share what’s next. Stay tuned!
Posted by Jonathan Rochelle, Group Product Manager, Google Apps team
Vevo CEO Rio Caraeff says CPMs are creeping up to $20 for some of the video portal’s most lucrative advertising partnerships – compared to the $2 that he says was traditionally charged around online music videos.
Talking at Billboard’s Music & Money conference, he also said that Vevo sold 85% of its ad space last month, and now has an audience of 37 million people in the US and seven million in Canada. 20-30 million videos are being streamed every day, and while 90% of Vevo’s traffic is coming from YouTube, Caraeff says that’s not a problem. “People can drink from whatever faucet they want to. Ultimately we want the water to come to our well.”
Meanwhile, Vevo has started making 15-30 second video clips to promote emerging artists, sponsored by brands. It’s a sign that the site is looking beyond pure display ads to pull in the dollars from its advertising partners.
Micropayments startup PlaySpan has another partnership to add to the list. The startup has signed deals with hi5, THQ and Nickelodeon, and most recently Adobe. Today, PlaySpan is partnering with Nonoba, which offers a Ning-like platform for game development.
Nonoba’s GameRise allows anyone to develop and manage customized gaming sites within a community. PlaySpan powers micro-payments across over 1,000 video games and virtual worlds and has virtual goods storefronts on Facebook, MySpace, within games and on its standalone site. With the new partnership, PlaySpan will offer Nonoba’s 4,000 Flash games to marketplace customers. PlaySpan’s microtransactions will also be offered to Nonoba’s developers to allow Flash game developers to monetize their games.
With all of the partnerships PlaySpan is racking up, the startup is fast securing its place as a player in the micrpayments space. In December, PlaySpan revealed some telling numbers about the strength of the virtual goods space, reporting that over $30 million was spent on virtual gifts over the holiday season. Last year, PlaySpan acquired micro-transaction app developer Spare Change, which powered micropayments across 700 social networking apps on Facebook, MySpace, and Bebo.
Yesterday, the United States Natural Gas Fund (UNG), one of the largest and most heavily-traded exchange-traded commodity products, hit its all time low, falling nearly 4% on signs of weak demand and expectations for balmy weather across the country. Since its inception in April 2007, UNG has been one of the most popular and controversial tickers in the ETF industry. It’s also been one of the most volatile, a trait that attracts short-term traders with a big appetite for risk. But one day of the week stands out as particularly active: as many energy traders are well aware, UNG is generally a big mover–both up and down–on Thursdays.
When UNG launched in April 2007, there were already a handful of commodity products (DBC had launched more than 14 months previously). The market’s reception to a fund offering exposure to natural gas prices was a positive one, and UNG saw moderate cash inflows for the first year and a half of its existence. At the beginning of 2009, UNG’s assets had grown to more than $700 million, making it one of the largest exchange-traded commodity products. But the fund’s growth to that point was nothing compared to what lay ahead.
One of the recurring stories in recent years (at least around every major election) is the need to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil. A number of alternatives have been proposed–including wind, solar, and water power–with limited success. As the campaign for natural gas as the “fuel of the future” picked up steam–thanks in large part to the high profiles and deep pockets of some major supporters–investors (mostly small, individual investors) began rushing to get a piece of UNG. The fund saw cash inflows of $5.7 billion in 2009, more than all but three other ETFs (GLD, EEM, and TIP). UNG finished the year with assets of $4.6 billion and an average daily trading volume of 30 million shares.
Not surprisingly, the increase in assets led to an increase in scrutiny. UNG had become so large that it controlled a significant portion of the near-month NYMEX natural gas futures, raising concerns over the fund’s contribution to speculation in natural gas markets. After the SEC declined to immediately authorize the issue of additional shares, UNG began acting like a closed-end fund, at one point trading at a 20% premium to its net asset value. UNG ultimately began issuing new shares, and the premium disappeared, as many warned it would.
UNG also introduced a new word into investor vocabularies: contango. Because UNG utilizes a futures-based strategy to accomplish its objectives, its price depends not only on changes to the spot price of natural gas, but on the slope of the futures curve as well. In 2009, natural gas markets were consistently contangoed, but prices remained relatively stable, resulting in a wide gap between a hypothetical return on spot prices and UNG’s share price. Natural gas prices were basically unchanged in 2009, but UNG lost more than 50% of its value to the “roll yield” (see What’s Wrong With UNG? for a closer look at how contango impacts UNG).
UNG is no stranger to volatility–it regularly moves up or down by at least 100 basis points in a single session–but the fund has seen particularly large movements on Thursdays. The timing is no coincidence: that’s the day the Energy Information Administration (EIA) gives its natural gas storage report, a highly anticipated data release that details the current level of natural gas inventories in the U.S. (due to physical properties that make transfer and storage difficult, natural gas is largely a local commodity, as opposed to crude oil which has a more global market). UNG is generally active throughout the week, but the EIA storage release is always the high point.
While the weekly change in natural gas inventories is estimated by a handful of energy analysts, the actual tally often varies significantly from expectations. When the weekly EIA report shows that inventories either fell by more than analysts had anticipating or increased by less than expected, it’s generally an indication of strong demand for natural gas, and UNG tends to rise. When stocks fall by less than expected, it’s generally an indication of weak fundamentals for natural gas. One way or another, UNG is generally very active surrounding the release of the EIA bulletin.
UNG’s price has moved by at least 200 basis points in more than half the trading sessions since its inception. In about 10% of Thursday sessions, UNG moves by a whopping 5% or more. The median daily basis point change on Thursdays (on an absolute basis) is 2.2%, higher than any other day of the week.
| UNG’s Average Volume | |
|---|---|
| Thursday | 14.7 million |
| Other Days | 11.3 million |
| Since inception. Source: Yahoo! Finance | |
Not surprisingly, UNG’s trading volume generally surges around the weekly data release. Since its inception, UNG’s average Thursday trading volume is about 14.7 million shares, roughly 30% higher than other days of the week.
Unfortunately for investors looking to make a quick buck, UNG’s big Thursday swings come on both the upside and the downside. But it is obvious from looking at the chart above that Thursday returns are skewed towards the negative, suggesting that perhaps analysts are biased towards a bullish stance on gas and expectations of high demand.
For more ETF insights, sign up for our free ETF newsletter.
Disclosure: No positions at time of writing.
Related Stories:
We've been told that Australia can support a population of up to 30 million - entrepreneur Dick Smith thinks this is a dangerous proposal.
He spoke to Madonna King this morning.
Bravo to President Obama. I am really proud of him. He tried to engage Congress and the country in the televised Health Care Summit. As proud as I am of the President, I am equally frustrated and disappointed in what went on at the summit. At the end of the day, cooperation in congress continues to be impossible. I don't even know if the Democrats can get health care legislation passed. The President let Republicans know starting over is not an option and "baby steps" won't cut it. "Americans don't want us to wait," he said. Americans do not want to wait and more importantly, we cannot and must not wait. We must go for the gusto.
Think about this: If health care is provided to the 30 million-plus uninsured individuals, there will be an immediate increase in the GDP. There will be more hospitals, doctors, nurses, janitors, and other administrative and support staff. This will provide increased dollars for even the smallest communities in the country. With increased income, people can buy homes, go out to dinner, buy cars, and finally improve our economy. Also it would provide more opportunities for people to concentrate on wellness and the ability to stay healthy, once we get companies like Anthem Blue Cross to either lower their rates and play fair with us, or thrown out of California and the rest of the country.
Judging from your comments posted, most of you feel the same way. We need it now. We can't wait until 2013 or 2014 it must be completed in 2010. We cannot afford another 39% increase in our premiums next month or at anytime in the future. Angela Braly, CEO WellPoint, parent of Anthem Blue Cross, stated that "current premium increases are not their fault." (as she takes home double digit millions in salary and options and spends $2.5 million on retreats). She seems to be saying that Anthem is the victim, not the perpetrator. By the way, Anthem has been guaranteed a 30% profit over many years. Where has all that money gone? Have they invested into equities that would cushion the bad times? I do not have the answers but I sure would like to investigate all of these issues.
As I have explained to you in the past, by holding premiums for just two months starting today, we (Californians with individual policies) save conservatively close to $320 million. We need to figure out a way to maintain that savings. If there are 800,000 individual policies issued from Anthem Blue Cross in California, just think what we can do if we band together. We can have a major affect on Anthem, California legislature, and the US Congress. What are your thoughts?
The system is broken. The only way to fix it is to stand together for our future health, not the health of Anthem Blue Cross. Feel free to send this article to everyone you know. California is not unique to its concerns about Anthem. It seems that most other states are having similar problems as well. Thanks to all of you, our coalition is getting some critical media attention. Matthew Garrahan, Los Angeles Bureau Chief for the Financial Times, did a terrific article on Feb 24th, "Business Model comes under heavy fire" clearly outlining our agenda. "The doctor may have found a supporter in Barack Obama," said Garrahan, in his story about Throw The Bums Out. "In his weekly online and radio address, the US President said the bottom line is that the status quo is good for the insurance industry and bad for America." And Mr. President, we promise you, we at Throw The Bums Out are going to change that.
Monday on The Ed Show Tom Harkin expressed pessism about the public option's chances:
SCHULTZ: But why do I sense a "yes" out of you? If it were to come to the floor, you would vote yes for the public option, would you not?
HARKIN: Ed, I'll tell you this straightforward. Not if it meant that it would sink the whole health care reform bill.
There's a lot of other stuff in there I care very deeply about -- getting rid of all of these pre-existing conditions, insurance rescinding these things, covering 30 million people, giving tax credits to low income so they can buy insurance, getting more competition out there. These are very important things to have for our country, and so I have to weigh all of that.
And if we have a bill sent to us from the House, a reconciliation bill that does not have the public option in there, then if we were to do that, if we were to add it here, that would sink the whole bill. And I don't want to sink this bill. I want to get this bill passed. I want it on Obama's desk and have him sign it.
SCHULTZ: Yes. We all do, Senator. But if it were just a single issue and a single reconciliation attempt at a public option, you would vote for that, wouldn't you?
HARKIN: Ed, not if it doomed the entire bill.
Meanwhile, Tuesday on Countdown Kent Conrad left the door cracked open:
LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: Senator Conrad, I want to start by asking you about the public option. It's now up to 34 senators supporting it. Is that something you could support if it was included in the reconciliation bill?
SEN. KENT CONRAD (D-ND), SENATE BUDGET CMTE. CHAIRMAN: It would depend entirely how it's constructed. And, you know, I wouldn't sign a blank check for any provision. I'd want to know the details.
So Tom Harkin is now a big public option pessimist, and Kent Conrad has cracked the door open. Obviously, Harkin didn't completely rule the public option out, nor did Kent Conrad deliver a ringing endorsement of it. And Harkin also still says he supports the public option, whereas Conrad is equivocal at best. Still, compare what they are now saying is possible to what they were saying was possible just a few months ago:
It's an interesting shift in tone -- from both of them.
Micropayments startups PlaySpan is racking up the partnerships. The startup has signed deals with hi5, THQ and Nickelodeon, and today, with Adobe. PlaySpan the payments platform for Adobe’s developer service, codenamed Shibuya. PlaySpan powers micro-payments across over 1,000 video games and virtual worlds and has virtual goods storefronts on Facebook, MySpace, within games and on its standalone site.
In private beta, Shibuya allows Adobe developers to monetize their Adobe AIR applications through a try-and-buy mechanism, and allows developers to upload and sell their applications on the Adobe AIR Marketplace. To enable micro-payments via PlaySpan, developers can add a few lines of provisioning code, set the price and trial period, and then publish the application with the payments technology. Developers will also receive reports, analytics, and automatic settlements on a monthly basis.
The Adobe Air Marketplace allows consumers to try paid applications on for free. If they like the application they can purchase it using a credit card, PayPal, an Ultimate Game Card or over 85 other global payment methods provided by PlaySpan.
The micropayments startup has been securing key partnerships, and a deal with Adobe only validates its place as a player in the micropayments space. In December, PlaySpan revealed some telling numbers about the strength of the virtual goods space, reporting that over $30 million was spent on virtual gifts over the holiday season. Last year, PlaySpan acquired micro-transaction app developer Spare Change, which powered micropayments across 700 social networking apps on Facebook, MySpace, and Bebo.
Lattice Semiconductor (LSCC) this morning raised its guidance for its first quarter ending April 3, sending the stock sharply higher in early trading.
Lattice now sees revenue up 21%-25% sequentially, up from previous guidance of 8%-12% growth. The company said the higher forecast reflects “robust growth across all product lines.”
Gross margin is now expected to be 55%-57%, up from previous guidance of 54%-56%.
Operating expenses are now expected to be about $30 million, up from a previous estimate of $29 million, due to acceleration of some R&D, and increased sales expense.
LSCC this morning is up 35 cents, or 11.4%, to $3.43.
At 11:00 this morning, Jerry Brown will announce that he's running for governor of California, because he's cycled through all the other jobs in the state, and he's back at stage one. (It's a Buddhist thing.) He joins a race already in progress between Steve Poizner, a billionaire with no personality, and Meg Whitman, a billionaire with multiple personalities. We're 99 days out.
Q) How can there still be 99 days until the election? I saw so many Meg Whitman ads during the Olympics, I thought kissing her ass was a sport.
A) Meg Whitman has a lot of money and buys a lot of ads. She just started airing attack ads against Steve Poizner, a man some polls show her leading by 30 points. Oh, and the election isn't in 99 days. That's just the primary.
Q) Steve Poizner has a billion dollars too. Where are his ads? When's he going to start making me want to kill myself if I hear his name one more time?
A) Steve Poizner doesn't need fancy ads. He has ideas.
Q) Like what?
A) You know California's $20 billion deficit? He's going to get rid of it with tax cuts.
Q) Okay, don't talk to me about Steve Poizner anymore. Ask me about the serious candidates.
Fine.
1) Which candidate has pledged to spend up to $150 million of their personal fortune to win the election -- the first public office they've ever sought?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
2) Which candidate has, so far, refused to debate an opponent and has spent the bulk of the $30 million they've already put into the campaign on ads?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
3) According to the L.A. Times, which candidate told their primary opponent to drop out of the race, or, in the words of a campaign consultant, "You know, Steve, if you proceed, the campaign will leave your political career in shambles because we will spend that much money to beat you and pretty much destroy you?"
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
4) Which candidate was the inspiration for John Ritter's character in the underrated 70s comedy Americathon?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
5) According to the L.A. Times, which candidate has "warned labor leaders that if they gave money to Democratic operatives planning to attack her, the billionaire candidate would respond by spending millions to qualify a ballot initiative that would make it harder for unions to use dues for political purposes"?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
6) Which candidate's mother said: "Meg was a pretty good swimmer. But at meets, I had to be there, because if she wasn't at least first or second, she'd be screaming with rage."
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
7) Who said "Money doesn't talk, it swears."
Bob Dylan
Meg Whitman
8) Which candidate appeared in a Reaganesque pose on the cover of a business magazine with a horse that turned out to be a rental?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
9) Which candidate took a million dollar bribe from Goldman Sachs -- and a position on their board -- but had to give both back like a rented horse?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
10) According to a flyer someone stuck on my windshield in the parking lot at Target, which former California governor covered up the Kennedy assassination on orders from the Pope and the Knights of Columbus?
Jerry Brown
Earl Warren
11) Which candidate has been a governor before?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
12) Which candidate has never done anything for anyone except for money and the main chance?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
At 11:00 this morning, Jerry Brown will announce that he's running for governor of California, because he's cycled through all the other jobs in the state, and he's back at stage one. (It's a Buddhist thing.) He joins a race already in progress between Steve Poizner, a billionaire with no personality, and Meg Whitman, a billionaire with multiple personalities. We're 99 days out.
Q) How can there still be 99 days until the election? I saw so many Meg Whitman ads during the Olympics, I thought kissing her ass was a sport.
A) Meg Whitman has a lot of money and buys a lot of ads. She just started airing attack ads against Steve Poizner, a man some polls show her leading by 30 points. Oh, and the election isn't in 99 days. That's just the primary.
Q) Steve Poizner has a billion dollars too. Where are his ads? When's he going to start making me want to kill myself if I hear his name one more time?
A) Steve Poizner doesn't need fancy ads. He has ideas.
Q) Like what?
A) You know California's $20 billion deficit? He's going to get rid of it with tax cuts.
Q) Okay, don't talk to me about Steve Poizner anymore. Ask me about the serious candidates.
Fine.
1) Which candidate has pledged to spend up to $150 million of their personal fortune to win the election -- the first public office they've ever sought?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
2) Which candidate has, so far, refused to debate an opponent and has spent the bulk of the $30 million they've already put into the campaign on ads?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
3) According to the L.A. Times, which candidate told their primary opponent to drop out of the race, or, in the words of a campaign consultant, "You know, Steve, if you proceed, the campaign will leave your political career in shambles because we will spend that much money to beat you and pretty much destroy you?"
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
4) Which candidate was the inspiration for John Ritter's character in the underrated 70s comedy Americathon?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
5) According to the L.A. Times, which candidate has "warned labor leaders that if they gave money to Democratic operatives planning to attack her, the billionaire candidate would respond by spending millions to qualify a ballot initiative that would make it harder for unions to use dues for political purposes"?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
6) Which candidate's mother said: "Meg was a pretty good swimmer. But at meets, I had to be there, because if she wasn't at least first or second, she'd be screaming with rage."
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
7) Who said "Money doesn't talk, it swears."
Bob Dylan
Meg Whitman
8) Which candidate appeared in a Reaganesque pose on the cover of a business magazine with a horse that turned out to be a rental?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
9) Which candidate took a million dollar bribe from Goldman Sachs -- and a position on their board -- but had to give both back like a rented horse?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
10) According to a flyer someone stuck on my windshield in the parking lot at Target, which former California governor covered up the Kennedy assassination on orders from the Pope and the Knights of Columbus?
Jerry Brown
Earl Warren
11) Which candidate has been a governor before?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
12) Which candidate has never done anything for anyone except for money and the main chance?
Jerry Brown
Meg Whitman
Stephen Colbert presented his late-night audience with an interesting metaphor for health care reform Monday.
Republicans and Democrats are like a husband and wife fighting over whether to have a health care baby. But "you're never going to get pregnant while both of you are in bed with the insurance companies," Colbert said.
After spending a week focusing on the Winter Olympics, Colbert turned his attention to last week's health care summit. "The only way it could have been more boring was if they were curling," he joked.
Comparing the summit to a "seven-hour marriage counseling session," Colbert said that one of the parties -- the GOP -- was "not being emotionally honest" and should fess up and admit it doesn't want a health care baby.
"Don't hide your true feelings, guys, repeat after me: fuck 'em!" Colbert said. "If those 30 million people want health care, let them get a better job or join the Army or go to Canada or eat Flintstones vitamins ... stop faking care-gasms."
This video is from Comedy Central's The Colbert Report, broadcast March 1, 2010.
After nearly a year of our work for health-care reform, the debate seems to be reaching the end. News reports indicate that the president will propose his plan for moving forward, and climactic votes could come soon.
So what are we to make of the current bill? While it is deeply flawed, it nevertheless does extend coverage to 30 million people currently without insurance and provides subsidies for them to purchase it. And despite many disappointments with what a real health-care reform bill could have been, covering 30 million more people is still a big deal. But the most telling argument for finally passing something is that the cost of doing nothing about health care is far greater.
A New York Times report summed up, very starkly, the likely consequences of doing nothing. With no action by Congress, "The unrelenting rise in medical costs is likely to wreak havoc within the system and beyond it, and pretty much everyone will be affected, directly or indirectly."
Nearly every mainstream analysis calls for medical costs to continue to climb over the next decade, outpacing the growth in the overall economy and certainly increasing faster than the average paycheck. Those higher costs will translate into higher premiums, which will mean fewer individuals and businesses will be able to afford insurance coverage. More of everyone's dollar will go to health care, and government programs like Medicare and Medicaid will struggle to find the money to operate ... The higher premiums will also persuade more businesses, especially smaller ones, to decide not to offer insurance. More people who buy coverage on their own or are asked to pay a large share of premiums will find the price too high.
I am forced to conclude that while this very flawed legislation may be the lesser of evils, the consequences of inaction to America's families would be far greater. So rather than issuing a moral clarion call to action, let's just hope this finally passes, and then immediately get to work to make it better. If this effort fails, most observers think that Congress might not get back to health care for ten or fifteen years; and all the terrible costs and consequences the Times article analytically predicts are very likely to come true.
Jim Wallis is the author of Rediscovering Values: On Wall Street, Main Street, and Your Street -- A Moral Compass for the New Economy, CEO of Sojourners and blogs at www.godspolitics.com.
+Click here to get e-mail updates from Jim Wallis
