Podcasts about previously john

John Risbridger served for 17 years as pastor of Above Bar Church in Southampton. For most of the past year he has been working on an MA in Global Missiology and he and his wife, Alison have been appointed as the new leaders of the Catalyst Leadership and Theology training course. Previously John worked for … Continue reading The Leadership Journey Podcast: John Risbridger →

Episode description:This week on Unicorny, Dom is joined by co-host Adam Greener from Digital Radish, to interview John Watton, VP of marketing for VMware. Today's big topic is how to scale a B2B tech business.In the conversation, John explains what you need to think about when building an integrated revenue generation engine and they discuss first and third party data as the feeder for your engine.The team also talks about the importance of place in marketing and what is happening in the talent market right now.About Selbey Anderson:Selbey Anderson is one of the UK's fastest growing marketing groups. Its agencies operate globally to help businesses in complex markets win the future. With deep sector expertise in financial services, tech, pharma, biotech and industry, Selbey Anderson's clients are united by the complexity of marketing in regulated, heavily legislated or intermediated markets.About the host:Dominic Hawes is CEO of Selbey Anderson. He's been in the marketing business for over 25 years having started his professional career after six years in the British Army. He spent his early career in agency before moving in-house and into general management.About the guests:John Watton is VP of marketing for VMware, an American cloud computing and virtualisation technology company. Previously John was senior director for Global Marketing at Adobe. He was director of global marketing for Expedia, he's also worked for The Octopus Group and Microsoft.John has been recognised for his marketing leadership with numerous awards including Gartner and 1to1's ‘Marketing Optimisation' Award, CRM Magazine's ‘CRM Elite Award' and Stevie's Customer Service and Sales ‘Best Demand Generation Campaign' Award. John is also a regular speaker and blogger, and has been recognised in LinkedIn's Top 10 Most Engaged UK Marketers, was voted one of the UK's Top Online Marketing Influencers by TopRank and was B2B Marketing Magazine's Marketer of the Year.Resources:https://selbeyanderson.com/https://www.vmware.com/uk.htmlhttps://digitalradish.co.uk/This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Podder - https://www.podderapp.com/privacy-policyChartable - https://chartable.com/privacy

Episode description:This week on Unicorny, Dom is joined by co-host Adam Greener from Digital Radish, to interview John Watton, VP of marketing for VMware. Today's big topic is how to scale a B2B tech business.In the conversation, John explains what you need to think about when building an integrated revenue generation engine and they discuss first and third party data as the feeder for your engine.The team also talks about the importance of place in marketing and what is happening in the talent market right now.About Selbey Anderson:Selbey Anderson is one of the UK's fastest growing marketing groups. Its agencies operate globally to help businesses in complex markets win the future. With deep sector expertise in financial services, tech, pharma, biotech and industry, Selbey Anderson's clients are united by the complexity of marketing in regulated, heavily legislated or intermediated markets.About the host:Dominic Hawes is CEO of Selbey Anderson. He's been in the marketing business for over 25 years having started his professional career after six years in the British Army. He spent his early career in agency before moving in-house and into general management.About the guests:John Watton is VP of marketing for VMware, an American cloud computing and virtualisation technology company. Previously John was senior director for Global Marketing at Adobe. He was director of global marketing for Expedia, he's also worked for The Octopus Group and Microsoft.John has been recognised for his marketing leadership with numerous awards including Gartner and 1to1's ‘Marketing Optimisation' Award, CRM Magazine's ‘CRM Elite Award' and Stevie's Customer Service and Sales ‘Best Demand Generation Campaign' Award. John is also a regular speaker and blogger, and has been recognised in LinkedIn's Top 10 Most Engaged UK Marketers, was voted one of the UK's Top Online Marketing Influencers by TopRank and was B2B Marketing Magazine's Marketer of the Year.Resources:https://selbeyanderson.com/https://www.vmware.com/uk.htmlhttps://digitalradish.co.uk/This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Podder - https://www.podderapp.com/privacy-policyChartable - https://chartable.com/privacy

Producer John Heinsen focuses on the development of TV, film and multi-platform projects through his company Bunnygraph. He sits on the Executive Committee of the Producers Peer Group of the Television Academy of Arts and Sciences as well as the Influencer Advisory Board of Sparks & Honey (Omnicom). Previously John served as Vice President, New Media for the Producers Guild of America (PGA) and was founding Co-Chair of the Guild's VR Task Force and Mobile Committee. Originally from Chicago, he is a Graduate of the American Film Institute (AFI) Conservatory and the University of Arizona.Check out John's work at:https://manabu.eu/https://www.amuletstudio.eu/Credits Include...Return to Le Cateau 1917 (Documentary)The Annual Academy Awards starring Billy Crystal, Ellen DeGeneres, and Seth MacFarlaneLone Hunter starring Tom ChoiThe Mongolian Connection starring Kaiwi LymanPlease like and subscribe, it helps us out a lot.Music is Snowbound by Dennis MitcheltreeEpisode still image is from Manabu.eu.Follow Us on Social Media!Greater & Grander on YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/GreaterGrander  Greater & Grander on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/GreaterGrander Greater & Grander on Twitter - https://twitter.com/GreaterGrander  Greater & Grander on Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/GreaterGrander    Register and Get a Free List of Special Info on Jobs in Hollywood - http://greaterandgrander.com/special-job-openings-giveaways  Check out past episodes and bonus content on the Greater & Grander website - http://greaterandgrander.com/tag/producers-lounge-podcast 

John Cochrane is an economist, specializing in financial economics and macroeconomics, the Rose-Marie and Jack Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. Previously John was a Professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and before that at the Department of Economics. Josh is also an author of the Grumpy Economist blog.   In this episode we talked about: John's Background in Economics Interest Rates & Inflation Modern monetary theory  Milton Friedman Market outlook  Fiscal policy Macroeconomic Environment Useful links: https://www.johnhcochrane.com/ https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/   Transcription: Jesse (0s): Welcome to the Working Capital Real Estate Podcast. My name's Jessica Galley, and on this show we discuss all things real estate with investors and experts in a variety of industries that impact real estate. Whether you're looking at your first investment or raising your first fund, join me and let's build that portfolio one square foot at a time. Ladies and gentlemen, you're listening to Working Capital, the Real Estate podcast. I'm talking with John Cochran today. John is an economist and the Rosemary and Jack Anderson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institute.   He's a former professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, and the Department of Economics, and the author of a great fantastic blog that you should check out The Grumpy Economist. John, how you doing today?   John (45s): Good, thank you.   Jesse (47s): So we talked a little bit before the show, John, you know, the podcast itself, the listeners that we talk a lot about the kind of environment that we play in as entrepreneurs and real estate investors and that being the economy. And you have a up a book that, you know, I heard on another podcast the Fiscal Theory of the Price level, which will put a, a link to and despite the title and to scare anybody off. Maybe you could give a kind of an overview of first of all, maybe your background in economics and, and kind of the work you do, and then we could chat a little bit, a little bit about the book.   John (1m 22s): Great. Let's see. I'm, I'm economist and I've been thinking about money and inflation since 1982 and I've split my time between thinking about that and thinking about stocks and bonds. So money inflation, business cycle stocks and bonds and a whole bunch of other things. Being an economist is a wonderful thing because we, you can, you can jump from one thing to another and, and actually, you know, make real contributions in lots of places. The book is called The Fiscal Theory of the Price Level.   If you Google me and find my website, you'll find the book. You will also, the book is full of equations and designed to convince my fellow economists that they need to come over to this. There are some essays on the same website, which I re recommend. You start with, fiscal histories are particularly like no equations and tries to tell a different story about where inflation came from and where it's going in the US over the last, in the postwar period. The basic idea is where does inflation come from?   Not so much too much money chasing too few goods, but more importantly, too much overall government debt relative to what people think the government is willing and able to pay back. And if you're sitting on say, oh, 30 trillion of government debt and you think government is, is good for about 20 trillion of it, what you do is you try to get rid of that. It's terrible invest. What do you do with an overpriced investment? I think everybody understands this. What do you do with an overpriced house? You sell it. But if we all try to sell government debt, then the only thing we can do for it, it is, oh, buy houses.   And we've been put upward pressure on the price of goods and services. So that ultimately is where inflation comes from. That doesn't mean the Fed doesn't have a big role to play, so I won't bother you the equations, but interest rate policy still is quite important in figuring out where inflation will go. But it isn't everything and when people are, are, don't fundamentally trust the government, there's really not that much the Fed can do about it. The Fed can kind of smooth it out for a while, but there's not that much. So I'll, I'll stop there and we can see how deep you want to go into theory or into explaining the real world or into real estate.   Jesse (3m 34s): Yeah, I think what would be interesting is that from, you know, it wasn't too long ago, we were oh 7, 0 8, 0 9, it was a different environment from the financial crisis, but we had lower interest lowered interest rates to such a degree where people were starting to question the traditional, the traditional economic framework where we have interest rates at this low amount. We had quantitative easing, but we didn't seem to have any inflation. Maybe you could talk a little bit about, you know, what mechanisms were at play during that time and, and if there is a, you know, if there's a logical connection between that environment, you know, what past that and, and where we're at right now.   John (4m 13s): Yeah, so I don't buy there, there's a lot of blah blah about how the Fed kept interest rates absurdly low over 10 years and so forth. Really the Fed is not that powerful. The Fed cannot keep real interest rates low for actually 20, 30 years that they have been very low by historical standards that has to come from the real economy. The Fed can move things around for a year or two, but in the end, very low interest rates come from real factors and interest rates were low, inflation was low.   People were willing to hold the government's debt part that the fiscal situation in the US wasn't great, but there wasn't a lot of news about it. And I think at least not just 7, 8, 9, but also throughout the 2000 tens when interest rates remained low despite deficits. I think the people holding us treasuries say, Look, us is a great country and yes, the CBO reports are scary, but America will always do the right thing after we try everything else.   As Winston Churchill, I guess did not say, but he should have said, and you know, that fixing the long run fiscal problem in the US is not that hard. We just have to sit around and decide we want to do it. So sooner or later we'll do it. I think the, the five, no, why are we having inflation now? The government in the pandemic printed up $5 trillion of new money, well, it printed up three and, and borrowed another two and sent people checks. And that's, that is just massive.   And I, I think people are starting to question, is the government really good for it? And we're seeing that not just in the US and tumult the treasury market. We're seeing that in the uk. We may be starting to see that in Europe as well. Well, so I think that kind of explains the difference. Now, I'm, I'm telling stories, but at least there's plausible stories here.   Jesse (6m 5s): So when it comes to the understanding that in the entrepreneurial space and real estate and the greater economy that we, we go through cycles, we go through time of growth, we go through time of contraction, Is this just an artifact of, of just the modern economy that we're gonna have ebbs and flows and we're gonna have times where, you know, the, the getting's good and, and then times when it's not so not so great. Or is the, is the chief goal the ultimate goal to have some sort of normality that plays out for a longer period of time?   John (6m 36s): I think everyone's goal is normality that plays up for some period of time. And you're asking a deep question, which I won't answer, is how much of fluctuation, especially in, in real estate is, is natural to the economy? How much of it is a, you know, some pathology of the private economy that some government might be able to fix someday? And how much is induced by government policy? I would say for real estate investors batten down the hatches. We're on our way to a tough time. This one is pretty obviously induced by government policy and, and not just monetary policy and fiscal policy.   You know, we, we saw certainly in 2007, 2008, how the regulatory environment encouraged booms and busts. And I think our current regulatory environment makes matters worse rather than makes matters better, you know, subsidizing the boom and then pulling everything back in the bust. But it's certainly where we're heading now is, I think ask your parents and grandparents about the 1970s. I think it's fairly clear we have a burst of inflation that that comes from somewhere. I think it comes from the, you know, the massively overdone stimulus, but take your pick where it comes from.   You know, in the 1970s we had inflation that came from fiscal policy. Johnson wanted the Vietnam War and the Great Society, and then we had also oil price shocks. Ah, welcome to the 1970s. You know, get your flowered shirts and your bell-bottom jeans out cuz oil price shocks get things going. The fed is late to the game and then the fed slams on the brakes. Does that sound familiar? So I think it's fairly clear where we're going to go. Our fed has woken up and I think it's a, I can't really bet on where the economy's going, but I think, I'm pretty sure what the fed's gonna do.   As long as inflation remains high, the Fed is gonna keep raising rates 75 basis points a shot. And so we will see how, what I don't know is if that will lower inflation, how long that will lower inflation, but the fed's gonna keep raising rates. I think it's fairly clear that is going to cause an economic slowdown, if not a recession. I mean they're, what they're trying to do is add just enough recession to offset the boom. You know, you're trying to land a plane, they call soft landing. You're trying to land a plane while the engines are gone full tilt, which ain't that easy.   So they're trying to add enough and, and typically the fed fed adds more recession. So I, I think it's quite possible we head into recession, but the mechanism of what the fed's trying to do is raise interest rates. And that what does that hurt? That raising interest rates doesn't so much make you go out for burgers less often. And so often demand for restaurants raising interest rates is designed to to to lower interest sensitive spending. Okay. Unpack fed speak codes, that means you, Mr real estate, the design here is to raise interest rates, which lowers house prices, makes people less willing to sell houses, lower raises, mortgage rates makes it harder to buy houses.   So, you know, the whole point is to try to soften down a real estate boom. Not made any better by our country's ridiculous zoning planning and other bureaucracy that I, so I live in Palo Alto where it's just infuriating Yeah. Where house prices have been driven very, very high. Not so much by too much demand, but by just the refusal of the government to allow usli.   Jesse (9m 58s): So I was just speaking with you before the podcast. I was just coming back from San Diego. I live in Toronto and and Canada and, and I find that Ontario here is pretty similar in policy too. A lot of the California policies when it comes to real estate. I do wanna ask about a specific thing here on inflation, but before we do on that real estate, on the real estate topic, what we saw for the last few years was an extremely high, especially in our markets and the major markets in the states, an extremely high push on asset valuation, specifically in industrial and multi-res and low, low cap rates, which don't always follow interest rates, but you know, the spread is, is usually somewhat consistent.   I guess the question here is we do have inflation now we have a business real estate where we do pass on inflation typically to our customers, ie. Renters. But what do you think that the, and I I take asset values not just in real estate, but the stock market in general. I think the question often people have is how do we have the valuations going one way from the asset perspective in, in, but inflation hitting people in a different way on the consumer level like the, the interplay there.   John (11m 10s): Yeah, thank you. You put on my asset pricing hat. I mean one of the most fundamental things you have to understand with asset pricing is that when interest rates go up, values go down. When bond yields go up, bond prices go down. And so why are we seeing the stock market go down? Why are we seeing property values go down? You know, every asset, there's two things. There's the cash flow and there's the discount rate go, you know, back to school. Here we go.   Why? Because if an alternative investment can get you a higher rate of return, then you know you're gonna pay less for, you know, this, this whatever investment we're talking about a house or a stock or whatever. In some sense that's good news for very long run investors. When you see all asset valuations, stocks, bonds, real estate going down at the same time, what you're seeing that that effect is just the required rate of return going up, but it means the underlying cash flows are the same as they were before.   So unless you have to post margin Mr UK pension funds or you know, unless you're cash constrained in some sense, the long run investor can just wait it out. It means that those, you know, the dividends you'll get from your stocks haven't particularly gone down the, with the rents you'll get from your house or in fact going up and you know, you can have rising rents and lower property values. Well because the required rate of return goes up. So if you can just wait it out, those, those rents are there.   Now also the, the rents are rising. You know, you, we have to put our inflation hat back on. If you are not, if something isn't going up 10%, it's going down. That goes for everything. Anything that's not, you know, if your rent, if your rent is only going up 10% a year, then it's just treading water, relative inflation. If your wages are not going up 10 per nine, 10%, they're going down. Hello, this is to my boss.   So that, I think that's why it's possible both things they go opposite direction. Now, on top of that, we are I think heading into at least an economic slowdown, if not a recession. And that will bring, you know, pressure on, on the dividends and the cash flows, on the rents and so forth. And real estate is, I shouldn't be telling you about real estate, you know, way more than me, but location, location, location, yeah. So there's all sorts of low rents in, you know, Gary, Indiana or places downtown San Francisco. Places don't wanna be, people don't wanna be anymore.   So it depends on being in the right place, which is where people still wanna be and where unfortunately you're on the wrong side of this, where governments don't let competitors build apartment houses to, to lower their ends on.   Jesse (14m 2s): Yeah. And I think part of it, to me it seems it's the imperfect nature of especially real estate. You know, we can be as sophisticated as we want on the commercial side, but it, I think the stickiness of prices is, is just that very real aspect that the bid ask spread is still there. And owners don't want to admit that they're gonna have to write down to a certain extent these assets. No,   John (14m 25s): I must, this is one from an economist point of view, this is one of the most classic puzzles of real estate. Why is it in soft markets people clinging to yesterday's price rather than, you know, why don't, why don't we have just auctions? You know, I'm gonna say yeah, people keep hoping for it to turn around on, on the downside. And so trading volume falls when the prices are going down. There must be something about, you know, not willing to recognize Mark to market losses or,   Jesse (14m 53s): I I, yeah. I think it's part of the reason that so many investors I would take, take myself included, get into real estate, it's that I can't press a button and sell the thing. I think it's just the aspect that the the the cost, the, the selling costs is so great. But I I totally get what your, your point of view cuz we deal with in commercial real estate and we're supposed to be these sophisticated investors, pension funds, REITs and Yeah, I think that yeah, they just, they clinging to yester yesterday's or last year's price. I think that's, well   John (15m 23s): I know some of them like university endowments. Yeah. Have a cynical view. Why do university endowments like Stanford's invest in a lot of real estate and not just Vanguard total market portfolio and save themselves in van, in Stanford's case, $800 million a year on fees. Well, not marking at the market every year is, is very convenient for not saying, Oh we lost 20% of your money last year on occasion. But I dunno, that's, that's a pet theory that may be false.   Jesse (15m 51s): So, So John, there's a quote that I know you're, you're very familiar with and it's, i i I venture to guess it's somewhat of a misquote cause I don't think it takes the whole quote into account, but it's from Milton Freeman and it's that inflation is always an everywhere a monetary phenomenon. I think he was a little bit more specific, but that's usually the headline. What are your thoughts on that? Because I think you're, you're kind of proposing that fiscal seems to be an equation, part of the equation that, that the mon the mons have left out.   John (16m 23s): Yep. I think Friedman was 90% right and he was maybe 99% right in 1935 and 1965 and, and less so today, most of the episodes that you look at, he was deeply historical in fact based, he wasn't a big lots of equations theorist, but most of the episodes he looked at were cases where governments were printing up money to finance deficits and therefore causing inflation. You, you know, why is Argentina, Venezuela, Zimbabwe having inflation?   Not because their central bankers are too dumb to know what they're doing, but because they are, they they want to spend money and they can't tax it and they can't borrow it, so they print it. Now that is money in that case is just another form of government debt. So, you know, fiscal theory and monetary theory agree entirely. If the government is printing up money to finance a deficit, you get inflation. And that's, I think what we just saw. Now, the disagreement is, is much more subtle.   Suppose the government drops 5 trillion bucks from helicopters, you feel great, you go out and spend it, you create inflation. But suppose at the same time they tell you, Oh by the way our burglars went to your safe and took 5 trillion of treasury bills out of the safe. Or more realistically, you know, they send you a stimulus check for 10,000 thousand bucks, but they also say, Oh by the way, your taxes are going up 10,000 bucks today. Now will that cause inflation? What I've just done is I've, I've wiped out the question of, of wealth, the feeling that this stuff is, is yours to spend and we've just changed it to you have too much money and too few bonds, so the composition of your portfolio is a little off.   You have too many fives and tens and not enough twenties. Is that gonna make you go out and spend like crazy? Hmm, not so obvious. So in fact, the core monitor is prescription is that you can, all that matters is controlling the quantity of money. Don't worry about the quantity of bonds so that if you take in money and give out bonds or gi or take in a bonds and give out money, that's crucial for inflation. Whereas I think it's the overall quantity that that really matters. And, and you can see that's a much less obvious proposition.   Jesse (18m 42s): So his, his prescription, I think, you know, I think generally was that from, from a policy standpoint was that we have some percentage, I don't something similar to a Taylor rule where we are going to raise, raise kind of rates at a consistent percentage each year. I think, I think if I remember there was a, a video or quote, he said, just get a computer and replace the Fed. You know, what, what was, what was the perspective there? What was his, his intent and and what other policy mechanisms do you think like writing this book that, that we have at our disposal or the fed does?   John (19m 18s): Yeah, so to just, to, let me finish the last thought and and add to your question in Friedman was, was right, there's nothing logically wrong about what he said, but it's a world where money really matters. Where, where in Friedman's world you had to cash a check at a bank and get out cash on Friday if you wanted to eat dinner on a Saturday. So, so to let them use, there were no credit cards, there was no I iPhone and he was also thinking of a world where government, nobody worried about the US government paying back its debt.   So if you look at the footnotes, it was always, oh by the way, you know, this only holds if everyone trusts the government to pay back its debt. So there's a very real sense in which, you know, he gave a logically coherent theory for a different world. And we live in a different world. We live in a world where, where we have credit cards, where the money that matters reserves, pays interests. And where we're a little bit worried about Gartner, Now let's back to your, let me now answer your question. Friedman advocated that the Fed should just let the stock of money grow at 4% a year and just, you know, get rid of the huge building and the press conferences and the 15,000 economists and others just let money grow at fourth percent.   He did not argue that this was the best, a perfectly rational all seeing, you know, central planner could do. He just recognized that the Fed is run by humans and they're gonna get overenthusiastic and they're, they're, his analogy was, it's like a, a shower you'd turn on the hot and it would get too hot and turn on the cold and it would get too cold. Just leave it alone and it'll be okay because in his historical analysis, mo the Great Depression as well as many of the postwar sessions were caused by the Fed being too late to the party and then, you know, not just taking the punch bowl away, but, but you know, throwing ice on everybody or or whatever.   Now in 19 eight, the problem first problem with that is in 1980 the Fed did try to just control the money supply and we found out it didn't work. So controlling the money supply it, it led to a lot of volatility and I think even Friedman recognized it. But John Taylor came along and said, well the Fed doesn't have to control the money supply. It could be much more predictable. It can set interest. That's what our fed does. Our fed sets interest rates. It doesn't even pretend to control the money supply because that doesn't, we discovered the real world is the head of theory, the real world discovered controlling the money supply doesn't work.   And and theory is just now with, with my book and some others catching up. So John Taylor has, has this approach, well, okay, the Fed setting interest rates, but rather than sit around a table and, and burn the incense and wave the dead chickens and, and consult the astrologers and figure out what to do, Freedman was right. Being more predictable, not not just figuring out on a base would be much better for markets for everybody because as you know, as, as everyone is everybody's guess, all the volatility in the economy is guessing what the Fed is gonna do.   This is a deep point, you know, what is the financial press about all the time? Is it about how many, you know, the zoning sanity comes to the zoning council of Palo Alto or is it about people moving to, to Toronto is gonna drive no drive housing prices, It's all about what's the Fed gonna do, what's the Fed gonna do, what's the Fed gonna do? So you can tell right there that the Fed by making off the cuff decisions, is in, in in, is putting volatility in the economy. So Taylor came up with this Taylor rule raised interest rates systematically with inflation, which was designed to work like the money growth rule to make it very clear and transparent to stop us guessing all the time about what the Fed is going do.   It, it isn't, Taylor does not claim it's perfect. He doesn't claim that that the god that the Fed thinks it is couldn't do better. The all-knowing, all seeing perfectly rational economic planner of course could do better. He just recognizes the fed's human, it's a bureaucratic institution. It's, it's liable to group think it's gonna be late. And that expectations matter so much. Being clear and transparent about what you're gonna do is, is better than the current, just make it up as you go along.   So there's your, Sorry, you asked a question for a history of monetary economics and you got it.   Jesse (23m 49s): So there is no homo economists out there at the Fed.   John (23m 54s): Homo Bureaucratics is the best we can hope for and you know, we all criticize the Fed. I I I criticize the Fed and I think too harshly cuz I know most of the people at the Fed and, and let's just be clear, these are really good people, these are really smart people. The 1500 PhD economists, I think that's the number that they, as well as the ones at the Bank of Canada are really good, really smart people. There's no corruption here, but they didn't see the biggest inflation of, of your lifetime coming.   So they've got a whole, you know, staff of their, their mandate is inflation. They have a huge staff of economists, the best people in the world at it. They just couldn't see it coming. There are limits to what bureaucracy can do. So simple and transparent has some advantage. Not cuz people are bad or corrupt, it's just, you know, the best bureaucracy in the world can't, you know, we, we saw the Soviet Union fall apart for just that reason. Planning don't work.   Jesse (24m 54s): So I had a podcast, I think about a year ago now, two podcasts. One was a, the name is escaping me, but it was a professor from George Mason on the one hand. And on the other hand it was a bond trainer. A bond trader locally here. And we were talking about modern monetary theory and you know, for listeners, you know, look it up. I I hate to, I hate to do that, to have a huge explainer. But basically what I, you know, you can just tell by the nature of those two conversations or maybe not one was very, very much in favor of it, one was questioning its existence just high level.   Maybe you could, you could kind of get your view on what mon modern monetary theory ex expounds or tries to expound and, and has this last year or last two years, has that, has that been the nail in the coffin for them or has that been, has that bolstered their theory? How do you think that has played into what we've seen now as two second, you know, blurbs in the news that was this really to, from my perspective as a layperson, kind of a fad of economics for, for a while?   John (25m 60s): Yes, it was. If, if your listeners are interested, I wrote a review of Stephanie Kelton's book in the Wall Street Journal, which you can find either there or on my website, which goes into much more detail, modern monetary theory. What was a fad? And one way of noticing it's a fad is that they wrote popular books, Three quarters of Stephanie Kelton's book is about the wonderful ways the government can spend printed money and how desperately important it is to spend the money. Not, not so much why printing it won't cause inflation.   And it was a bunch of sort of, it's interesting, you look at the citations, they stop in the 1940s there was some ideas warmed over from the 1940s with zero contact with anything anybody has done since now maybe everything we've done since 1945 and economics has been wrong. You know, fields and the social sciences go off on fads before I think Kasey and economics was, was one big mistake too. But at least you have to, you know, if you wanna persuade people, you have to at least show that you know what they said and and why it's wrong.   And it did. It was superficially plausible. It, it, there were some ingredients you can take some good ingredients and, and, and just, just cuz the soup is rotten doesn't mean every ingredient was rotten. So they had one insight that, yeah, governments, they, one of their things was governments that borrow in their own currency don't have to default cuz they can just print up money to pay back the debt. Yeah, that's right. And if that causes inflation, they can just raise taxes to so soak up the money. Yeah, that's right. But they took that and and merged those with a whole bunch of things, you know, then the rotten parts of the soup go in to make, make the claim.   I think Kelton said there always is slack in the US economy. Now that's a quote. And the present tense of the verb is also a quote. And we just found out the end of slack in the US and Canadian economy. So we're done. There is not always slack in the US economy if you print up a lot of money and send it to people as Kelton, as Kelton asked, all the modern monitors said, print out money sent to people. Don't worry, there won't be any inflation. It's the clearest prediction you can ask anyone to make. They made it, boom, we printed up money, sent it to people and what do we get?   Inflation. So I, I hope that one goes on, on the dust bin of history, but it was never serious. And certainly you should look in, in today's media world, you have to learn to be an educated consumer and, and one way in which you're an educated consumer is to look at a theory and ask now of, you know, the theories that are, that are accepted by the mainstream are typically wrong and academia's full of all sorts of politically convenient theories.   But, you know, if it's completely out of the mainstream, you know, that does raise an alarm bell that you should, you should ask. And this one was, was one such. And, and if it's also, if you can see that it's all totally motivated by a political agenda, then that should also raise some alarm bells.   Jesse (29m 2s): So I have one of my favorite books here by Joseph Schumpeter recommend anybody that's never heard of Joseph Schumpeter, check out his work. I think, you know, you'll hear terms like creative destruction. One of his favorite quotes just on your point of, of politicians, I I always like was politicians are like bad horsemen who are so preoccupied with staying in the saddle that they can't bother to figure out where they're going. And you know, it's unfortunate that a lot of the, the policies that you know, that we're trying to get at here are, I guess, you know, tied up in, in the political process   John (29m 36s): If I could just, so it's fun to make fun of monitors, but I think we need need to recognize what a watershed moment inflation is for much more serious and well worked out economic ideas for 10 years. All of the worthies of economic policy, all of the government agencies, all the alphabet soup of international agencies, were talking about secular stagnation. That we just have lack of demand, that we need more fiscal stimulus. That the key to prosperity is to borrow or print money and hand it out.   You know, don't worry about the supply side of the economy whatsoever. Even Janet yell herself that our congressional testimony was asked about, Oh, should we run another one point whatever, $6 billion of government spending? And she said, don't worry about it. Interest costs are so low, interest rates are so low, you know, you can make the payments. I think what, you know, one of the, one of the greatest fallacies of real estate, let's get back to real estate, is don't worry, you know, as you look at the monthly payment, here's the big McMansion, Oh, but I don't have a job, don't worry about it.   Get this adjustable rate mortgage with the teaser. Look at the monthly payments you can afford. The monthly payments. Well Janet Yellen went up and said, we can afford the monthly payments. Don't, don't worry about going big. That has hit a brick wall of reality with inflation. And, and here these are all of the, you know, Larry Summers for example, who to his great credits saw the inflation coming before anyone else. But he had spent 10 years saying secular stagnation, our problem is lack of demand borrow. And, and we, it turns out that supply wall boom was a lot closer than we thought it was about like, you know, we, we were 1% away from the supply wall in the beginning.   It wasn't 10, 20, 30% away. So this just, this is a watershed, a bunch of ideas by very respectable people were totally wrong. And our economic challenge now is much harder. It's get the sand out of the gears. Increasing supply is not about throwing money on it, it's not about sending people checks. It's about fixing the zoning code. And can you rehab a commercial building in Manhattan to be apartments? No, because the zoning doesn't let you have bedrooms on the interior.   It's a great man and glaz parts, you know, you have to fix every single thing that's wrong in the economy. That is totally different. But that's where we are. So this is a big, big moment.   Jesse (32m 1s): Yeah. And even on the, the cane side of, you know, I don't the context of it, but the, the idea that markets can, markets can stay irrational longer than than they, than you can stay solvent. I think from the real estate perspective was just this idea where you saw very sophisticated investors buying prices at asset values where it just made no sense. There was negative leverage in some situations and just this idea that, that you there would just continue to be a hockey stick graph, especially here in, in this city and certainly in other ci major major markets in the states.   John (32m 33s): Well a fact of all such booms is you gotta ride the bubble while you can and you, you can make a lot of money buying, flipping, hoping to gut it doesn't crash before you can sell the darn thing. And that can go on for years and years. And if you just sit that out, if you say, oh, you know, properties overvalued stocks are valued, well, you know, three, four years go by and all your buddies are getting rich and you're sitting there, you know, if you go short losing money on your short positions, if you just sit it out, you know, playing golf while they're all getting rich through it's stuff to do.   Especially if you are, you know, working on someone else's behalf.   Jesse (33m 10s): So John, I just wanna be mindful of the time here. I do, I do have a question in chapter four in your book you talk about debt, government debt. And I wanted to kind of go a little bit more granular. I don't know the figures for the states offhand, but I know that Canadian household debt is, is debt to disposable income is is quite high. I believe it's 1.84 for every dollar, you know, Canadians have in consumer debt. What's your take on on that micro-economic aspect of, of the family debt within the family and then that impact into kind of this grander, you know, macroeconomic environment that we're in?   Is it something that you look at?   John (33m 50s): Well, I can offer some sort of general, So there's government debt which has to get paid back by raising taxes, but not raising tax is really by economic growth. Your only hope for the government paying back its debts is if they let the economy grow. Cause if, if you raise tax rates, that kills the economy. So you kill the tax base, you don't, you don't get a lot of taxes. Now private debt is a different matter. Let's remember, you know, your, your mortgage is is my pension. So everyone's liability is someone else's asset.   And it's funny how, you know, all of our economic policy, blah, blah, we simultaneously love and bemoan the same thing on the one hand, oh, you know, too much debt people can't pay back. On the other hand, not enough debt. Send more debt to my constituents so they can buy houses, which is it, you know, we want, government wants us to consume more, but it also wants us to save more and to pay more taxes. How's that happening? And, and you know, a lot financialization is great economies grow because entrepreneurs can borrow to finance new businesses because real estate developers can borrow to build apartments for the rest of us, they're doing us.   I don't know why they're so maligned. They do us a wonderful service. You wanna build your house on your own. How about somebody who knows what they're doing, do it, but they need to be able to borrow to do it. So debt that can be paid off is not so much a problem. Now problem comes in when debt can't be paid off, but risk in return. Guys, I think we need to get back to an economy where risk, we all understand if you buy Tesla stock and, and it turns out that hydrogen and and not batteries is the way of the future, or China shuts off the supply of batteries, you know you're gonna lose your, your money or you know, GM turns out to know what they're doing, you're gonna lose your, we all understand equity holders losing your money.   Now somehow, if you buy something called debt and, and you're getting a 5% return where everyone else is getting a 2% return, you're not supposed to lose money every now and then. So, you know, even debt is a great thing. Risky debt's a wonderful thing, you know, but cafe at em Thor, we need to understand as society that, that making risky loans is a great and wonderful thing, but you're gonna lose money every now and then and don't go crying to grandma government every time you lose your money. Now, you know, debt is, why do we worry about too much that we worry about if it turns into financial crisis?   And that's, you know, that's a problem. That's what the Nobel Prize just gave was given to Diamond and Member Yankee and felt that big about. Is that,   Jesse (36m 27s): Which I believe you, you just read or wrote a blog about, right? Yeah,   John (36m 31s): I just wrote a blog post about it, which is, you know, there's, we, we as a society need to get around, stop having financial crisis. Now that means the debt must be able to lose money when the, when it defaults in a way that isn't so incredibly painful for the society as a whole. And that I think is a failure of government regulation. We, you know, why do we regulate banks? Let's look at a bank's asset portfolios, the bank's asset and compare it to, I don't know, Tesla now, whose assets are more risky, whose cash flows are more risky, a bank or Teslas, you know, by, by three orders of magnitude.   Tesla Bank is, has a, has a portfolio of government guaranteed loans. I mean possibly, you know, yet where are all the regulators? The regulators are all looking at the bank. Now why is that answer? Because banks are leveraged up to the hilt and if they lose enough money to go under, they're, they're kind of big monopolies and, and they, our economy loses the capacity to, to make new debt. So why is that? We need to get the leverage out of the banks. And then you get to a financial system where people can default on debts and it doesn't bring the whole thing crashing down.   So debt's good, default is good, let it happen. Default is reorganization. We just need to not, you know, we kinda have a hostage here. The banks have taken the whole economy and and holding it hostage saying, you know, you government can't let anyone fail or else, and, and it's our political and even the Fed a financial crisis is not the possibility that somebody somewhere might lose money someday on some investment. No, you know, risk and return.   Entrepreneurial capitalism lose money. Financial crisis is when, when, when there's a run on short-term debt and that brings down the banking system. We, we can fix that.   Jesse (38m 26s): It's, you remind me of a, i we'll put a link to it. A really good, I dunno if it was an essay, but it was years ago, Thomas so wrote comparing the American Depression and the branch banking system that we have in Canada. Cuz you know, oftentimes people think Canadians, that we have these five large banks, which we do, or four depending on who you're asking. But we have an extensive branching system. And it was a, it's was interesting to see the difference of branching where it wasn't allowed in states during that time, I guess right after the depression.   But we'll put a link for anybody that's, that's interested. Now   John (39m 1s): This is great important and, and I, you know, I wanna say something. So something nice about Canada, Ben, this is what Ben Bernanke got the Nobel Prize for, he said in the US and the Great Depression. Why was the Great Depression so bad? Well, cause all the banks failed. Now why did the banks and then once the banks failed, not all the banks, sorry, I'm exaggerating. Many banks failed in many places. And when the banks failed, they closed down. And the people in those banks who knew in, you know, Lincoln, Nebraska, who was good for it and who wasn't, who knew how to make loans, they were unemployed.   Why did that not happen in Canada? Well, because, because there are many ways to stop a bank run. And one of them is if a local bank fails, somebody else can come in, a large national bank can come in and buy up the assets, keep the people who know how to make loans employed, you know, stiff the creditors, stiff the stockholders, but keep the operations going. But that needs, the US had had prohibitions on on branches, It had prohibitions on interstate banking. There was no way all the mechanisms of saving a bank and keeping the profitable parts going didn't exist.   And they did exist in Canada, which is why your Great Depression was a whole lot better than ours. Now that doesn't mean the only answer to this is to have a monopolized banking system with four big banks. That, that kept Canada out of a crisis in the Great Depression, but that also leads to a certain amount of financial sclerosis. And so I, I don't want to endorse crony capitalism as the only answer, but it did, it did work better in that circumstance,   Jesse (40m 35s): Economics, real estate and Canadian banking history. John, I think we covered it all today.   John (40m 40s): Thank you. It's a great pleasure.   Jesse (40m 42s): John, for individuals that that want to connect or reach out, where can we send them? We'll put a couple links in the show notes.   John (40m 50s): My website, john h cochran.com and my blog, The Grumpy Economist. And if you just Google John Cochran, I come up first.   Jesse (40m 60s): This is Working Capital. John, thanks for being a part of it.   John (41m 4s): Thanks. Great pleasure.   Jesse (41m 11s): Thank you so much for listening to Working Capital, the Real Estate podcast. I'm your host, Jesse for Galley. If you like the episode, head on to iTunes and leave us a five star review and share on social media. It really helps us out. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me on Instagram. Jesse for galley, F R A G A L E. Have a good one. Take care.  

In a Zoo you need a curator, they're the person in charge of what animals the zoo works with. At Wild Planet Trust we have a curator for each animal department, Mammals, Birds and Lower Vertebrate and Invertebrates (LVI). In this Episode of 'So You Want To Work In A Zoo?' Matt and Ollie are chatting to John Meek, the person in charge of our LVI department. Previously John was a keeper, deciding on that career when he was only 8 years old, a head keeper and even curator at Newquay Zoo before he started looking after LVI across both Trust Zoos, Newquay and Paignton. In the discussion, they touch on moving animals, collection planning, conservation projects, returning animals to their country of origin and the classic question... What's you favourite animal? Visit Our Zoos: https://www.paigntonzoo.org.uk/ https://www.newquayzoo.org.uk/ Wild Planet Trust: https://www.wildplanettrust.org.uk/ Support us through our Amazon Wishlists: Paignton Zoo: https://amzn.to/327HJeb Newquay Zoo: https://amzn.to/3tDeWty

John Hobbins is the 2015 PGA Metropolitan Section Teacher of the Year and was also selected by Golf Digest in 2015-2016 Among the Best Teachers in New York State. A Senior AimPoint Instructor John is one of the most prolific instructors worldwide. Based in New York City at his Greenside Golf Academy at Trinity Centre, John is available for corporate outings, private lessons and also private clinics. Previously John was the Director of Golf Digest Schools as well as the Director of Instruction for Hyatt Hotels in Puerto Rico. He joins Oli to discuss everything AimPoint, Mark Sweeney and the true value and importance of it. The Podcast is proudly sponsored by Warwick House and SIC Golf.

John Cochrane is an American economist specialising in financial economics and macroeconomics. Formerly a professor of economics and finance at the University of Chicago, Cochrane serves as the Rose-Marie and Jack Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Previously John was a Professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and before that at the Department of Economics. He also writes the Grumpy Economist blog.All views expressed on this podcast are subject to change and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conexus Financial. This podcast is for educational purposes only and should not be relied upon as investment advice.

A Canadian citizen, John has a Bachelor of Business Administration from Simon Fraser University and a MBA from the Richard Ivey School of Business. He has over 10 years of investment banking experience in Ukraine and has spent many of these years also developing successful property investments in both Kiev and Montenegro. His prior positions include Chief Operating Officer with Dragon Capital, Managing & Founding Partner with Concorde Capital and Vice-President with MFK. Previously John had 10 years of retail and commercial banking experience with the Bank of Nova Scotia, Canada. During his time in Ukraine John has been regularly interviewed and quoted by The Financial Times, Bloomberg, Institutional Investor, Fortune Magazine, CNN Money, EuroWeek, EuroMoney, Focus Money, FDI Magazine, The Kyiv Post, Kontrakty, Delo, ForUm and Korrespondent.John speaks English, Russian and some Spanish, Serbian and French. Listen to ILAB 183 on iTunes here or subscribe on your favorite podcast app.   Where we are: Johnny FD – Ukraine / IG @johnnyfdk Sam Marks – Barcelona/ IG @imsammarks Derek Spartz - Venice Beach / IG @DerekRadio Sponsor: IndeedReceive a free $75 sponsored job credit to boost your job post at Indeed.com/ILAB Support Invest Like a Boss: Join our Patreon Discussed: Kiev Real Estate Recovery Fund: KRER Like these investments? Try them with these special ILAB links: ArtofFX – Start with just a $10,000 account (reduced from $25,000) Fundrise – Start with only $1,000 into their REIT funds (non-accredited investors OK) Betterment – Get up to 1 year managed free Wealthfront – Get your first $15,000 managed free PeerStreet – Get a 1% yield bump on your first loan *Johnny and Sam use all of the above services personally. Time Stamps: 09:55 – Why is it hard to get quotes from contractors in Kiev? 12:16 – Why are housing prices low in Kiev? 16:46 – How has the Hryvnia depreciation affected real estate prices? 20:31 – How are the businesses in Kiev starting up so quickly? 24:11 – Can you talk about your move from residential to commercial? 34:55 – Tell us about the residential space you converted to office space 43:46 – Can you tell us about the fund and the services they offer? 45:15 – Let's talk about the advisory side of your services 48:17 – Let's talk about the fund part of your business 49:42 – What are you buying into when investing in the fund? 51:12 – What is the minimum to invest in the fund?  54:07 – What are the fees involved with the investment? 56:31 – Is it possible to cash out your investment in US dollars as opposed to Euros? 60:49  – Johnny and Sam review If you enjoyed this episode, do us a favor and share it! Also if you haven't already, please take a minute to leave us a 5-star review on iTunes and claim your bonus here!  Copyright 2021. All rights reserved. Read our disclaimer here

Our guest, John Burton is CEO and co-founder of UrsaLeo, a company focused on bringing modern UI to the industrial world. Previously John had a 30-year career in semiconductors and founded multiple companies. In this episode, John and Bruce discuss: The process and technology involved in creating a 3D digital twin. Different use cases for 3D visualization of IoT data. The advantages 3D and 4D visualization of industrial data has over the more common 2D visualization of today. Selling the 3D digital twin to the OEM versus the end customer. The Flogistix case study, where the value, costs and time are quantified. Related links you may find useful: Season 2: Episodes and show notes Season 2 book: The Private Equity Digital Operating Partner Season 1: Episodes and show notes Season 1 book: IoT Inc Training: Digital transformation certification

John Dickinson is the recently-retired minister of Carnmoney Presbyterian Church in Newtownabbey – a congregation he served for nineteen years. Previously John served in churches in various parts of Northern Ireland, including Seaview, in North Belfast. In our conversation John talks openly about the recent loss of his wife, Christine, just a few weeks after a … Continue reading The Leadership Journey Podcast: John Dickinson →

The day-to-day role of a capital advisor and consultant is laid out for all by John Azar, accompanied by Hersh Rai. Expert Azar also shares with Rai the importance of the math behind the deal. Interested in being on the show? Visit our website at www.fouroakscapital.com/podcast or email me at brianbriscoe@fouroakscapital.comDownload our free investing guide at www.fouroakscapital.com----John AzarJohn is founder of Peak 15 Capital, a capital consulting firm for multifamily operators that can advise on all aspects of the capital stack. John also currently acts as a Managing Member of MACC Venture Partners, a syndicator based in Charlotte NC that owns and operates over 6000 multifamily units. Previously John was a co-Founder and Managing Partner of Boston Venture Partners (BVP), a private equity consulting and finance firm based in Boston specializing in real estate development, and structured finance.Get in contact with him by email azar@peak15capital.com orLinkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/jalalazar/----Hersh RaiHersh is an active duty Naval officer and a recent graduate from the United States Naval Academy. He commissioned as a Cryptologic Warfare Officer. Currently, he is pursuing his Master’s degree in Computer and Information Technology at Purdue University. During his time at Purdue, Hersh found a passion for real estate investing. He is focused on commercial multifamily and affordable housing. Through real estate investing, he hopes to teach others about the powerful investment opportunities it can present as well as teach others how to start their journey. He is excited to continue learning and connecting with others and hopes to make an impact in any way he can.​Contact him through email hersh@raivucapital.comor LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/hershrai/----Your host, Brian Briscoe, is a co-founder and principal in the real estate investing firm Four Oaks Capital. He and his team currently have 168 units worth $7.5 million in assets under management and are continuing to grow. He will retire as a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Marine Corps in 2021. Learn more about him and the Four Oaks team at www.fouroakscapital.com or contact him at brianbriscoe@fouroakscapital.com - be sure to let him know where you found him.Connect with him on LinkedIn, Facebook, or on Bigger Pockets.----Tweetable Quotes "[I]f you have a successful transaction, you should still look at the process and say, Okay, what did I do right? What made this transaction successful? What did I put in place that allowed me to have a successful closing? And on the flip side of the coin, you look at it from a different critical ways, like, hey, that that went really bad. What did I do that that went bad? What can I do to improve it next time?" -John Azar "I'd love to help all the sponsors out there. But unfortunately, not all the sponsors out there have deals that are worth funding. I want to make sure that I am diligent enough to work with the sponsor, I don't want to say educate them, but give them my perspective, unvarnished perspective on what their deal look like and what the likelihood of the funding is."-John Azar

Debra Musack and John Chambers share how they went from retired life on a fixed income as new Senior Mangers to Emerald Director in just 4 months! Now they’re stepping up again to Sapphire Director and as a result will earn a Leadership Bonus, $600 Car Bonus and they’re on their way to earning the new $1,000 Step-up Bonus!In addition to all the extra income they have also made a lot of new friends and they’re enjoying better health! Previously John was struggling with some health issues but after six months on NeoLife his doctor gave him a clean bill of health! Encourage everyone in your team to join us to hear their amazing story!

Our mission at Better Boards www.better-boards.com is to provide proven solutions for creating more effective boards. Our evidence-based board evaluations and board development programmes deliver tangible results.To fulfil our mission, we listen and give a voice to all who care about creating better boards - Chairpeople, CEOs, Senior Independent Directors (SIDs), Non-Executive Directors (NEDs), Company Secretaries, academicians, investors, and regulators.All the views expressed in our podcasts are the views of our podcast partners and not those of Better Boards. In this episode, you'll get exclusive insights from one of the most respected Chairman in the UK - John Barton. John is Chairman of EasyJet and Chairman of the Nomination Committee. He is also a Senior Independent Director of Luceco PLC and Non-Executive Director of SSP Group PLC and Matheson / Company Limited.John has served for three decades on boards of numerous FTSE organisations as Chairman and Senior Independent Director. In the City of London, he is known as "Mr Chairman". Previously John was CEO of insurance broker JIB Group plc where he became Chairman after the merger with Lloyd Thompson.Every time you tune in, we'll help you to develop and reinvigorate your board know-how and practice with insights, data, and practical advice. As a note for your diary new episodes are available every 1st and 3rd Thursday of the month. How can we help you and your board to become more effective? We at Better Boards are always delighted to hear from you. Get in touch. You can best reach us at info@better-boards.com. 

John’s helped over a dozen companies get Traction—fast-growing businesses like Bulu Group and CFO Systems that have both made the Inc. 5000 list multiple years in a row. Three of his clients are fellows of the prestigious Pipeline Entrepreneurs program. Previously John worked seven years one-on-one with visionaries around the country as their executive coach.   John is married and has 3 children under the age of 8 and he is a foodie. I'm much smarter after spending time with John.   Connect with John on LinkedIn Audible Free 30 days Blinklist

In this podcast episode, we interview John Reynolds who is an executive leader. John has been a leader at UnitedHealth Group as Senior Vice President and the CEO/ General Manager of Optum Connect. Previously John was the President of the Healthcare, Government and Biller Solutions for FIS  (Fidelity National Information Services, NYSE: FIS).  His background also includes experience in the banking industry as an SVP with Wells Fargo where he led the Global Trust & Custody business. John has an undergraduate degree in Economics and a Ph.D.  in Business, Organization, and Management. He is an Adjunct Professor at the University of Minnesota where he is a subject matter educator in the Dynamics of Leadership. John shares his experiences as a business leader and lessons he has learned in his career.

This is a very special podcast for us as it is our first debate format on Insureblocks. We were extremely privileged to have two titans/Jedi Masters from the blockchain community join us for this podcast. On one side we have Richard Brown, Chief Technology Officer from R3, builders of Corda, advocating for enterprises to use private blockchain systems. Whilst on the other side we’ve got John Wolpert, Team Lead at Web 3 Studio at Consensys, builders of Ethereum based blockchains, advocating for enterprises to use public blockchain systems. Have a listen to this fascinating podcast and if you’d like for Insureblocks to organise more debates on our show, do let us know.   About Richard and R3 Richard is the Chief Technology Officer at R3 an enterprise software firm that are the founders of Corda. Corda is an open source blockchain platform designed for the enterprise world. R3 initially began as a consortium of large financial firms trying to figure out what opportunity does blockchain represent for their firms and the implication blockchain may bring to their businesses. As part of this learning exercise and exploration they reviewed a number of blockchain platforms before deciding to build their own blockchain platform called Corda. Corda is available in an open source format and it is being used by a large number of firms to solve some interesting business processes.   About John and Consensys John is the leader of a team at Consensys called Web 3 Studio. Consensys is a company that is dedicated to building a platform to enable people to build on the Ethereum blockchain. John’s Web 3 team focuses, as he puts it, “on novel unexpected and exciting use cases that can help developers really get behind blockchain and Web 3.0” Previously John used to be the Global Head of Products at IBM’s blockchain and one of the cofounders of Hyperledger. However, John, doesn’t define himself as a Hyperledger guy or an Ethereum guy but more as a “stateful internet” guy. He is a big fan for pushing the managing of states in a decentralized manner.   What is Blockchain? - John According to John, blockchain is just one part of an evolution of the internet towards a stateful internet. In other words an upgrade to the present internet that is essentially led by companies soloing servers sitting around controlling state, memory and business logic. “There won’t be one chain to rule them all.” But now, I believe that in order for the Stateful Internet to avoid descending into a fight at the gates of Mordor, we do in fact need a trustless, permissionless, decentralized root chain playing umpire. This can be done today in a decentralized manner similar to how we experience passing messages right now with packets of information going back and forth between different routers. However, managing state is a lot harder than managing passing messages. As messages go through a router, a router doesn’t have to remember what state it was before, what state it is now and coordinate that state with billions of other routers. Ethereum offers the ability to manage state between routers in a decentralized manner.   What is Blockchain? - Richard For Richard, blockchain is a technology that enables us to do something we couldn’t have done before. It enables multiple different computers, controlled by different organisations that don’t necessary fully trust each other, to be in sync and to be in consensus about some facts their owners care about. Whether that’s a crypto, an insurance policy or anything else. To be able to know that what you see on your computer your counterpart sees the same thing. This works without any one party having undue influence or power over the other and without everybody having to cede control to some central entity or some cloud operator.   Background to this debate On the 3r of January 2019, Consensys published an article entitled “Busting the myths of private blockchains”.

Today's guest is the president and chief executive officer of AddisonLeadership Group, as well as the Leadership Editor for Success magazine. John Addison is joining us and he's out with a new book entitled, "Real Leadership: 9 Simple Practices for Leading and Living with Purpose." Previously John worked at Primerica Inc., for more than 25-years, rising through the ranks to become co-chief executive officer from 1999 to 2015. He was critical in steering the company through many changes, including the company's separation from Citigroup in 2009, which resulted in one of the most successful IPOs of the decade. Now, John is a world-class speaker and motivator who shares his business acumen and leadership insights. If you'd like to learn more visit www.somoneypodcast.com.