Podcast appearances and mentions of sherman antitrust act

Fix SLP was never just about making noise—it was built to challenge systems that gatekeep, exploit, and mislead. In this foundational episode, Dr. Jeanette Benigas and Preston Lewis, MS/SLP, explain why the CCC isn't just unnecessary—it might be illegal.We walk through the Sherman Antitrust Act, our official complaint to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and how we allege ASHA's CCC requirement may violate federal law by restricting access to jobs, supervision, and professional advancement in speech-language pathology.We expose the financial structure behind ASHA's business model, the myth of the clinical fellowship year, and how the CCC props up a pay-to-play system that disproportionately harms new grads, small business owners, and anyone without institutional backing.This is the legal case that lit the fire behind Fix SLP, and we're just getting started.Find Fix SLPs resources for students and new grads here.Want to earn some PDHs or CEUs with a discount? Find our most up-to-date promo codes and discounts here.Want to lead or join your state team? Email your name and state to states@fixslp.com.Become a sustaining partner to support our work.Follow us on Instagram.Find all our information at fixslp.com, and sign up for our email list to be alerted to new episodes and content.Email us at team@fixslp.com.Leave a message on our Minivan Meltdown line! ★ Support this podcast ★

This Day in Legal History: Standard Oil Breaks UpOn May 15, 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States, finding that Standard Oil had violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by engaging in monopolistic practices. The Court unanimously ruled that Standard Oil's dominance over the oil industry—achieved through aggressive acquisitions, predatory pricing, and exclusive agreements—constituted an illegal restraint of trade. As a remedy, the Court ordered the breakup of Standard Oil into 34 separate and independent companies, a dramatic reshaping of the American oil landscape. Among the entities created were companies that would later become industry giants in their own right, including Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and Amoco.The decision was a defining moment in U.S. antitrust enforcement, signaling the federal government's willingness to confront corporate consolidation. It aimed to restore competition and prevent the recurrence of monopolistic control in vital sectors of the economy. However, over the next century, many of the separated entities gradually reconsolidated. Notably, Exxon and Mobil merged in 1999 to form ExxonMobil, while Chevron absorbed both Gulf Oil and Texaco, and BP later acquired Amoco.Today, a majority of the original 34 companies—or their direct successors—are now part of just a few massive corporations. This reconsolidation serves as a cautionary tale: without vigilant antitrust enforcement post-breakup, market dominance can re-emerge in new forms. The Standard Oil saga demonstrates not only the power of antitrust law but also its limitations if not actively maintained. It underscores that breaking up monopolies is only one step—the preservation of competition requires ongoing oversight.The EPA announced it will weaken several Biden-era regulations on PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” in drinking water. Specifically, the agency plans to rescind enforceable limits on three types of PFAS—PFNA, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA (also known as GenX)—as well as on combinations of those and PFBS. At the same time, the EPA is giving water systems two extra years, until 2031, to comply with limits on PFOA and PFOS, the two most well-known and studied PFAS chemicals, citing the challenges especially for smaller and rural systems.The original Biden administration rule had set an enforceable limit of 4 parts per trillion (ppt) for PFOA and PFOS and a non-enforceable goal of zero exposure due to their cancer and health risks. The EPA says it will revisit its regulatory decisions on the other PFAS types it is now rolling back. Administrator Lee Zeldin framed the delay as necessary flexibility while maintaining protections against the most harmful chemicals, but environmental groups like the Environmental Working Group blasted the move as a concession to industry that puts public health at risk. Some state-level regulators expressed caution and said more time is needed to evaluate the impact of rescinding the additional PFAS limits.EPA Moves to Weaken Biden-era PFAS Limits for Drinking WaterU.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared before Congress for the first time in his new role, facing bipartisan scrutiny over his department's proposed 2026 budget, mass layoffs, and his response to a growing measles outbreak. Since taking office in February, Kennedy has overseen the dismissal of roughly 10,000 workers across major health agencies, aligning with broader Trump administration efforts to downsize the federal government. His budget plan calls for deep cuts, including $18 billion from the National Institutes of Health and $3.6 billion from the CDC.Lawmakers questioned Kennedy's controversial stance on vaccines—particularly during an outbreak that has resulted in over 1,000 infections and three deaths, largely among unvaccinated populations. Representative Rosa DeLauro accused Kennedy of promoting misinformation and endangering public health. Senator Bill Cassidy, who supported Kennedy's confirmation based on promises to uphold vaccine access and collaborate with Congress, emphasized the need for transparency and reassurance amid sweeping departmental changes.Kennedy defended the workforce reductions as a return to pre-COVID staffing levels and projected $1.8 billion in annual savings. Still, critics view the cuts as harmful to the country's public health infrastructure. His personal conduct also drew scrutiny after posting photos of himself swimming in Rock Creek, a site banned for public use due to unsafe water conditions.US health chief Kennedy faces lawmakers' questions on mass firings, measles | ReutersA growing number of major U.S. companies are proposing to leave Delaware as their state of incorporation—a trend being called “Dexit”—following Elon Musk's public fallout with Delaware courts. At least nine publicly traded companies, each valued over $1 billion, are preparing shareholder votes to move their legal homes, while five, including Tesla and Trump Media, have already relocated to states like Texas, Florida, and Nevada. The exodus is driven by concerns over Delaware's increasingly strict scrutiny of deals involving controlling shareholders, highlighted by a 2024 court ruling voiding Musk's $56 billion Tesla pay package.Companies say Delaware's legal environment has become unpredictable, especially for founder-led or insider-controlled firms. By contrast, states like Nevada and Texas offer looser standards and greater protection from shareholder litigation. For example, Nevada's laws shield corporate boards under the business judgment rule unless there is fraud, while Delaware courts still require fairness and transparency in insider transactions.In response, Delaware recently passed laws to limit judicial review of certain deals and curb shareholders' access to corporate records, hoping to stem the corporate departures. Still, critics like legal scholars and corporate counsel argue that Delaware's courts are now perceived as activist and uncertain, prompting companies to seek jurisdictions they believe offer more legal stability and control.In Tesla's wake, more big companies propose voting “Dexit" to depart Delaware | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Part of the reason why we wanted to start the Rethinking Economics series is that I think many aspects of economics, economic thinking, and economic institutions need reforming. And one of the main areas where this reform needs to happen is antitrust. Antitrust has become a popular and, as of late, bipartisan issue. Antitrust laws give the government power to regulate, manage competition, prevent monopolies, and stop harm to consumers. Antitrust powers were first vested with the government with the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, when businesses first began to reach their “giant” status. After 1890, there were some pretty substantive reforms to antitrust power that at times strengthened the government's ability to intervene in the economy, and at other times weakened it. I will let you, the listeners, determine whether you think the government has too much or too little power to intervene in markets, but what is undeniable is the growth of gargantuan companies like Google and Amazon, while the gap between the rich and the impoverished widens. And I'm sure many of you listening think these two phenomena are inextricably linked. So, how can the state better shape markets and market structures to shrink this gap?My guest today helps us reimagine the goals of antitrust and how it can be used to form innovation ecosystems to the benefit of society. Mr. Ahuja is a lawyer, researcher, and political organizer. He initially began his career as an antitrust lawyer at Latham and Watkins, where he mainly worked on competition and market structure cases. After a brief stint working for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, Mr. Ahuja became a Fellow with the Department of Energy, where he worked on reducing market barriers in solar energy. Mr. Ahuja is currently an affiliate of the University of Oxford and a Fellow at Harvard University's Growth Lab, where he researches and teaches antitrust and green development. He has written numerous publications that have appeared in newspapers and journals such as the Financial Times, Promarket, the Roosevelt Institute, and the Cambridge University Press. Mr. Ahuja earned his master's from Harvard in Public Policy and Oxford University in Law, and is currently a Ph.D candidate at Oxford.Together, we discussed Mr. Ahuja's innovation-as-capabilities approach to antitrust, green industrial policy, and how the state can shape markets and go beyond simply correcting market failures.To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

This Day in Legal History: Standard Oil RisingOn January 10, 1870, John D. Rockefeller and his partners incorporated the Standard Oil Company, marking a pivotal moment in American industrial and legal history. Standard Oil quickly became a dominant force in the oil industry, employing innovative practices such as vertical integration and aggressive pricing to outcompete rivals. By the late 19th century, the company controlled nearly 90% of the U.S. oil refining market, making Rockefeller the nation's first billionaire and one of the wealthiest individuals in history.However, Standard Oil's dominance also sparked concerns about monopolistic practices and the concentration of economic power. In 1911, following years of legal challenges, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States that the company violated the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. The Court applied the "rule of reason," determining that the company's practices unreasonably restrained trade and harmed competition. As a result, Standard Oil was ordered to dissolve into 34 separate entities, including Exxon, Mobil, and Chevron, many of which remain influential today.This landmark decision underscored the federal government's authority to regulate monopolies and enforce antitrust laws, shaping the legal landscape for corporate regulation in the 20th century. The case also highlighted tensions between industrial innovation and market fairness, a debate that continues to resonate in discussions of antitrust law and corporate power.The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, cleared the way for Donald Trump's sentencing in his New York hush money case, rejecting his request to delay proceedings. Trump, now president-elect, argued for immunity from prosecution, claiming the sentencing would distract from his presidential transition and harm his global standing. However, the court stated his claims could be addressed later on appeal and noted the sentencing's impact would be minimal, as no prison time would be imposed.The majority included Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and the court's three liberal justices. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented–which means there is a one-vote majority in the Supreme Court on the issue of Trump not being entirely above the law. Trump emphasized that the decision leaves room for appeals on broader immunity issues. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who prosecuted the case, supported moving forward with sentencing due to its public interest.Justice Juan Merchan ruled that a president-elect doesn't qualify for the same immunity as a sitting president but opted for an "unconditional discharge," sparing Trump any real penalties beyond the conviction. Trump remains focused on overturning the verdict, asserting the trial was flawed under new presidential immunity standards set by a prior Supreme Court ruling. The case could ultimately return to the Supreme Court for a final decision.Supreme Court Allows Trump Sentencing in NY Hush Money Case (2)Trump to be sentenced in hush money case, days before his inauguration | ReutersThe U.S. House of Representatives voted 243-140 to pass the "Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act," sanctioning the International Criminal Court (ICC) in response to its arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. The act targets individuals involved in prosecuting U.S. citizens or allies, including Israel, who are not ICC members. It marks strong Republican support for Israel following their takeover of Congress. The sanctions echo Trump-era measures against the ICC, previously imposed over investigations into U.S. actions in Afghanistan and later lifted under the Biden administration. These new sanctions extend to those aiding ICC operations and could, according to ICC President Judge Tomoko Akane, threaten the court's functionality and existence. The ICC defends its actions, citing sufficient evidence and the need to prevent ongoing crimes in Gaza.Forty-five Democrats joined Republicans in backing the bill, while no Republicans opposed it. The Senate, now Republican-controlled, is expected to prioritize the measure, allowing President-elect Trump to sign it shortly after his inauguration. The ICC has yet to comment on the vote. The legislation comes amid heightened criticism of the ICC's pursuit of war crime charges against Israeli leaders, accusations Israel denies.US House votes to sanction International Criminal Court over Israel | ReutersRudy Giuliani, former lawyer for President-elect Donald Trump, faces a second contempt hearing in Washington on Friday over claims he violated a court agreement in a defamation case brought by Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Wandrea “Shaye” Moss. The case stems from Giuliani's false allegations that the workers helped rig the 2020 presidential election. The workers accuse Giuliani of breaching an agreement barring him from making further defamatory statements, citing comments on his podcast suggesting ballot tampering.  Earlier this week, Giuliani was held in civil contempt by a federal judge in New York for failing to comply with information requests related to the $148 million judgment Freeman and Moss won against him in 2023. Giuliani is appealing that decision. If found in contempt again, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell could impose civil fines or jail time.This adds to Giuliani's growing legal troubles, including disbarment for spreading false election claims and criminal charges in Georgia and Arizona. Giuliani's lawyers argue his podcast remarks did not specifically reference Freeman and Moss and were part of his legal defense on appeal. However, the May 2024 agreement prohibits any public comments implying wrongdoing by the election workers.Giuliani faces second contempt bid over false claims about 2020 election workers | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Benjamin Godard.Benjamin Godard (1849–1895) was a French composer and violinist whose lyrical and melodic style earned him a place among the late Romantic composers of his time. Despite achieving considerable acclaim during his life, Godard's works have since faded into relative obscurity, overshadowed by contemporaries like Saint-Saëns and Fauré. His compositions, however, reflect a deeply expressive and refined musicality, blending the elegance of French Romanticism with a penchant for memorable themes.One of Godard's notable chamber works is his String Quartet No. 3, Op. 136, a piece that exemplifies his gift for balancing structural clarity with emotional depth. The third movement, "Minuetto molto moderato", is particularly striking. It reinterprets the classical minuet form with a delicately poised, almost dreamlike quality, showcasing Godard's skill in creating nuanced and intimate musical textures. The lilting rhythm and restrained tempo evoke a sense of grace, while the interplay between the strings lends the movement a sophisticated charm.This movement serves as a perfect closing theme for the week, offering a reflective and elegant departure from the bustling rhythms of daily life. The gentle, flowing melodies allow listeners to unwind while appreciating the timeless beauty of chamber music. Godard's Minuetto invites contemplation, serving as both a tribute to his artistic legacy and a serene conclusion to the week.Without further ado, Benjamin Godard's String Quartet No. 3, Op. 136. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Teddy Roosevelt, Trust BusterOn December 3, 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt delivered his first State of the Union address, where he boldly called for the dissolution of powerful business trusts. These trusts, large corporate conglomerates dominating key sectors like railroads, oil, and steel, were widely criticized for stifling competition and exploiting workers. Roosevelt argued that unchecked corporate power threatened the economic and political freedoms of ordinary Americans. This speech marked the beginning of Roosevelt's aggressive antitrust campaign, which sought to enforce the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890—a law that had been largely dormant due to weak enforcement. During his presidency, Roosevelt initiated lawsuits against 44 trusts, targeting entities like the Northern Securities Company, a massive railroad monopoly, and Standard Oil. His administration's victory in the 1904 Northern Securities case was a landmark decision, affirming the federal government's authority to regulate monopolies. Roosevelt's efforts earned him the nickname "Trust Buster," though he preferred to describe his approach as ensuring a "square deal" for all, rather than dismantling every large corporation indiscriminately. The 1901 address and the actions that followed redefined the federal government's role in economic regulation, setting a precedent for progressive reforms. Roosevelt's trust-busting legacy laid the groundwork for future antitrust policies and established the President as a central figure in addressing economic inequality and corporate overreach.Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell sharply criticized two federal judges for reversing their retirement plans, a move he claims prevents Donald Trump from filling their vacancies when he returns to the White House. Referring to the judges as "partisan Democrat district judges," McConnell accused them of undermining the electoral mandate by remaining active after the November election results. Though he didn't name them, McConnell's comments were aimed at U.S. District Judges Algenon Marbley and Max Cogburn, appointees of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, respectively, who had previously indicated they would take senior status—a semi-retirement—pending Senate confirmation of successors. McConnell labeled the judges' decisions as partisan interference, urging the incoming administration to consider recusal options for them. He also claimed their actions reflect a “political finger on the scale,” though no historical precedent or formal violation underpins his accusations. Notably, judicial replacements for both seats faced delays during Biden's administration due to Senate procedural traditions and partisan gridlock, complicating the nomination process.McConnell's critique appears selective, given his own record of partisanship in judicial confirmations. Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin countered by highlighting McConnell's refusal to advance Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination during Obama's presidency—a move widely criticized as unprecedented gamesmanship. McConnell also criticized appellate judges who announced retirements contingent on successor confirmations, calling potential reversals "unprecedented," despite the lack of ethical violations or rule breaches. Critics argue McConnell's remarks exemplify a strategic focus on judiciary control rather than a genuine concern for ethics or impartiality.McConnell Blasts Judges Who Reversed Retirement Post-Trump WinElon Musk's $56 billion Tesla compensation package was invalidated by Delaware Chancery Court Judge Kathaleen McCormick, marking a significant legal setback for the billionaire. The judge ruled that Tesla's board had been improperly influenced by Musk when it approved the plan in 2018, describing the arrangement as excessive and criticizing the board for capitulating to Musk's demands. This decision upheld her earlier January ruling, rejecting arguments from Musk and Tesla shareholders who had voted to revive the package.The ruling not only voids the record-setting payout but also requires Tesla's board to propose a new compensation plan, though the company has announced plans to appeal. Musk, the world's richest person, reacted by labeling the decision “absolute corruption” on his social media platform, X. The court also awarded $345 million in attorney fees to the shareholder lawyers who challenged the package, marking one of the largest legal payouts in U.S. shareholder litigation.The compensation case stemmed from a lawsuit alleging that Tesla's board failed to act independently and allowed Musk to orchestrate the details of his pay package. McCormick dismissed arguments that shareholder approval could override her judicial findings, emphasizing the limits of post-trial actions in reversing decisions. Tesla shares fell after the ruling, and the decision could prompt further scrutiny of corporate governance at the company.Musk's Multibillion-Dollar Tesla Payout Gutted by Delaware JudgeDelaware judge rejects Musk's $56 billion Tesla pay - again | ReutersCalifornia Governor Gavin Newsom has proposed a $25 million legal fund to prepare for potential conflicts with President-elect Donald Trump's administration. Announced during a special legislative session, the fund aims to bolster the state's ability to challenge federal policies on issues like reproductive rights, immigration, and environmental protection. Newsom emphasized that the initiative seeks to protect critical state resources, such as disaster relief and health care, while safeguarding civil rights and reproductive health care access.The funding would enable the California Department of Justice and other state agencies to swiftly respond to federal actions, with Attorney General Rob Bonta planning to expand staffing for legal battles. California has a history of such litigation, having spent $42 million during Trump's first term and filing over 120 lawsuits against his administration. Newsom cited past successes in securing funding and reversing federal actions as evidence of the strategy's effectiveness.The proposal also aligns with new legislative measures to protect abortion rights, including access to medication and enforcement of the state's Reproductive Privacy Act. Newsom's office expects the budget measure to pass before Trump's inauguration on January 20, ensuring California's readiness to counter any federal policies that could impact the state's economy or public services.California governor proposes $25 million war chest for legal fights with Trump | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg this week tackles the looming funding crisis facing Social Security, one of America's most vital anti-poverty programs. Without intervention, the program will face a shortfall by 2035, jeopardizing benefits millions of Americans rely on. To avert this crisis, I propose two practical and politically feasible solutions: raising the cap on taxable income and expanding Social Security taxes to include investment income.Currently, income above $168,600 is exempt from Social Security taxes, creating a regressive structure where high earners contribute a smaller share of their total income. Eliminating or significantly increasing this cap would not only generate substantial revenue but also ensure a fairer tax burden. Public opinion overwhelmingly supports this approach, favoring tax adjustments over benefit cuts or increasing the retirement age.Beyond raising the cap, policymakers should modernize the tax base by including investment income such as capital gains, dividends, and interest. In 2024, Americans earned $3.7 trillion in investment income, much of it untaxed for Social Security purposes. Even modest taxation on this income, especially above high thresholds like $400,000, could secure the program's solvency while reflecting the realities of modern wealth generation.Opponents might argue that taxing investments could harm economic growth, but careful, incremental adjustments would likely have minimal impact on investor behavior. Acting now allows for gradual changes and avoids drastic measures later, ensuring Social Security continues to deliver on its promise of financial security for all contributors.Social Security Faces a Crisis, but Sound Tax Policy Can Help This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In the podcast episode titled "Keeping the Playing Field Fair: How Antitrust Law Shapes Professional Sports," the discussion delves into the intricate relationship between antitrust law and professional sports. The episode begins by examining the Sherman Antitrust Act, which serves as the foundation for antitrust law in the United States. This act prohibits monopolies and cartels that restrain trade and harm competition. The episode then delves into the concept of the "single entity" defense, which is often used by sports leagues to argue that they are immune from antitrust laws. This defense argues that leagues, teams, and players are all part of a single entity and that any agreements or rules made within the league are not subject to antitrust scrutiny. However, the episode highlights that the "single entity" defense has limitations and has been challenged in several landmark antitrust cases. One such case, the landmark 1976 Supreme Court decision in Flood v. Kuhn, is discussed in detail. In this case, the court ruled that the reserve clause, which bound players to their teams for life, violated antitrust laws. This decision paved the way for free agency and revolutionized player movement in professional sports. The episode also explores other major antitrust cases, such as the 1984 ruling in North American Soccer League v. National Football League, which found that the NFL had monopolized professional football, and the 1995 decision in Major League Baseball v. United States, which upheld antitrust exemptions for baseball. The episode delves into the impact of antitrust law on various stakeholders in professional sports, including players, teams, and fans. It discusses how antitrust law has promoted fair competition, ensured player mobility, and protected the rights of fans to watch competitive sports. Finally, the episode concludes by considering possible future challenges and emerging issues in sports antitrust. It touches upon the rise of sports betting and the potential for data sharing and technology to impact antitrust law in the future. Overall, the podcast episode "Keeping the Playing Field Fair: How Antitrust Law Shapes Professional Sports" provides a comprehensive overview of the intersection of antitrust law and professional sports. It highlights the significance of antitrust law in maintaining fair competition, preserving player rights, and protecting the interests of fans. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Th City of Philadelphia just passed a new ordinance with a vote of 17-0 banning the use of algorithmic pricing for properties in the city. San Francisco was the first city to enact such a ban. Philadelphia is the second and it is expected that others across the nation will follow suit.  The city bill references an anti-trust motion brought by the department of justice. The Justice Department alleges that RealPage's pricing software has features that are anticompetitive and therefore violate the Sherman Antitrust Act, a law passed more than a century ago. --------------- **Real Estate Espresso Podcast:** Spotify: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://open.spotify.com/show/3GvtwRmTq4r3es8cbw8jW0?si=c75ea506a6694ef1)   iTunes: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-real-estate-espresso-podcast/id1340482613)   Website: [www.victorjm.com](http://www.victorjm.com)   LinkedIn: [Victor Menasce](http://www.linkedin.com/in/vmenasce)   YouTube: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](http://www.youtube.com/@victorjmenasce6734)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/realestateespresso](http://www.facebook.com/realestateespresso)   Email: [podcast@victorjm.com](mailto:podcast@victorjm.com)  **Y Street Capital:** Website: [www.ystreetcapital.com](http://www.ystreetcapital.com)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital](https://www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital)   Instagram: [@ystreetcapital](http://www.instagram.com/ystreetcapital)  

Welcome to Church Pew Sports Ep 158 - Armen Keteyian On College Football's Era of Chaos We welcome in NY Times Best-selling author, Emmy Award winner, and legendary investigative reporter Armen Keteyian to talk about his new book, THE PRICE: What It Takes To Win In College Football's Era of Chaos. Armen discusses the current state of college football, particularly focusing on the issue of player compensation and transfers... the recent case of the UNLV quarterback and the offer made by a Michigan fan to a top 10 quarterback. Armen also shared his insights on the NCAA, describing it as a cartel violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. He also mentioned the legal history of the NCAA, including the O'Bannon, Austin, and House cases. We also discuss the reality that the NCAA has been delaying and denying player compensation for decades, spending millions of dollars defending its indefensible practices. Order: THE PRICE   This week's CPS Starting Host Lineup: Bill Hobson Pastor Paul Miller David Collins --------- You can listen to EVERY episode of CPS by visiting Churchpewsports.com/ We would love to hear your thoughts, comments, and questions. Reach out to us at: churchpewsports316@gmail.com Stay connected to Church Pew Sports on Facebook and Twitter @CPewsSports316                

Live Nation- Ticketmaster has been sued under the Sherman Antitrust Act, and stands accused of holding a near- monopoly in the live concert space. What does that mean – and what does it mean for seeing live shows? Find out this week on Business Law 101!   Thanks for joining me for this episode! I'm a Houston- based attorney, run an HR Consulting company called Claremont Management Group, and am a tenured professor at the University of St. Thomas. I've also written several non-fiction political commentary books: Bad Deal for America (2022) explores the Vegas-style corruption running rampant in Washington DC, while The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures (2018) analyzes – and grades – the leadership qualities of the past 100 years of U.S. presidents. You can find my books on Amazon, and me on social media (Twitter @DSchein1, LinkedIn @DavidSchein, and Facebook, Instagram, & YouTube @AuthorDavidSchein). I'd love to hear from you!   As always, the opinions expressed in this podcast are mine and my guests' and not the opinions of my university, my company, or the businesses with which I am connected.

OA1058 We begin with Neil Gorsuch's recent appearance on Fox News. How normal is it for a sitting Supreme Court justice to go on Fox News, and did Gorsuch really just threaten the Biden administration over its relatively minor court reform proposals?  In our main story, we break down two major antitrust suits from the past week: Elon Musk's ridiculous claim that corporations which refuse to advertise on a social media platform which has failed to regulate neo-Nazi and animal abuse content are violating Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, and District Court judge Ahmet Mehta's extremely reasonable findings that Google's anticompetitive practices are in violation of Section 2. Also, Matt has some nice things to say about Richard Nixon. White House announcement on Biden court reform proposals (7/29/24) About GARM (WFANet.org) "GARM's Harm" report from the House Judiciary Committee (7/10/2024) Complaint in X v. GARM et al (8/6/2024) “Is Google Getting Worse? A Longitudinal Investigation of SEO Spam in Search Engines” J. Bevendorff and M. Wiegmann, et al., Leipzeig University (2024) Judge Amit Mehta's full ruling in US v. Google (8/5/24) If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

This week, host Troy Edgar explores the life and lasting impact of J.P. Morgan, the titan of American finance.  In this episode, we trace J.P. Morgan's company transformation from a family enterprise to a global financial powerhouse. Learn how his business practices laid the groundwork for modern banking and inadvertently sparked antitrust laws such as the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Act. Join us as we examine the interplay between business, government, and public interest that is still as relevant today as it was in the Progressive Era.  Recommended reading: Pulitzer Prize-winning author Ron Chernow's acclaimed biography "The House of Morgan: An American Banking Dynasty and the Rise of Modern Finance" A great follow-up episode is E21: U.S. Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA) on Big Tech Antitrust Issues and Bipartisan Cooperation.   Ameritocracy™ is produced by Prospect House Media and recorded in studio locations in Los Angeles and Washington DC.

This Day in Legal History: Sherman Antitrust ActOn July 2, 1890, U.S. President Benjamin Harrison signed the Sherman Antitrust Act into law, marking a transformative moment in American economic history. This landmark legislation aimed to prohibit the formation of trusts and monopolies that restricted trade across states, fundamentally altering the landscape of American industry. Named after Senator John Sherman, the act sought to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers.The Sherman Antitrust Act was a response to growing public concern over the power and influence of large corporations, which often stifled competition and controlled vast market shares. Notable entities affected by this law included John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil and the Bell System of telecommunications. Standard Oil, once a dominant force in the oil industry, was dismantled into smaller companies in 1911, following a landmark Supreme Court decision that found it in violation of the act.Similarly, the Bell System, which had monopolized the telecommunications industry, was broken up in 1982, leading to the creation of several independent companies. The Sherman Antitrust Act thus paved the way for more robust enforcement of antitrust laws and inspired future legislation, such as the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914.The act's passage represented a significant shift toward greater governmental regulation of the economy, aiming to protect consumers and ensure a level playing field for businesses. Over the years, it has served as a critical tool for the U.S. Department of Justice in pursuing antitrust cases. The Sherman Antitrust Act remains a cornerstone of American antitrust policy, highlighting the ongoing importance of regulating corporate power to maintain market integrity.The transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy and new technology is providing a significant boost to private equity fundraising, benefiting law firms specializing in these areas. Investors have raised $17.4 billion for energy transition projects by June, surpassing last year's total of $10.3 billion, according to Preqin. This surge is driven by tax incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act, public demand for climate change solutions, and advancements in technologies like carbon capture.Prominent law firms, such as Davis Polk & Wardwell, Gibson Dunn, and Vinson & Elkins, are seeing increased activity due to the growing interest in energy transition investments. Michael Piazza of Gibson Dunn noted that despite the rise in renewable energy investments, continued investment in oil and gas remains necessary to support the energy transition responsibly.Major funds include Brookfield Asset Management's $10 billion fund announced in February and Morgan Stanley's plan to raise at least $1 billion. Firms like Blackstone, TPG, and KKR are also dedicating substantial resources to energy transition projects.While private equity fundraising has generally been sluggish, the energy transition sector stands out. Last year, private equity aggregate capital reached its lowest level since 2018, dropping over 8%. Limited partners are holding onto portfolio companies longer due to fewer exits via IPOs and secondary sales, complicating fundraising efforts.Law firms with expertise in private credit, fund formation, and energy deals are capitalizing on this trend. Firms such as Latham & Watkins and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett have been instrumental in advising on significant private credit loans and fund formations. The demand for legal services in energy transition has prompted firms like Paul Hastings and Sidley Austin to invest in hiring specialists in private credit and finance.Overall, the focus on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives has further fueled the energy transition boom, as limited partnerships increasingly include ESG criteria in their investment mandates. This shift provides incentives for investors to choose funds dedicated to climate technology and ESG projects over traditional private equity investments.Energy Transition Boom Aids Lawyers During Private Equity SlumpRudy Giuliani has requested to convert his Chapter 11 bankruptcy to a Chapter 7 liquidation. If approved by Judge Sean H. Lane of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, a trustee will manage Giuliani's estate and liquidate his assets to pay off his creditors, including a $148 million defamation judgment owed to two Georgia election workers.Creditors had previously called for a trustee, alleging that Giuliani had delayed financial disclosures and moved assets out of their reach. Giuliani's lawyers denied any dishonesty, stating he was correcting past financial mismanagement. The motion to convert the bankruptcy was filed as a one-page document, indicating Giuliani's decision to pursue this legal option against what his spokesperson described as a "partisan and politically motivated proceeding."Judge Lane has expressed frustration over the slow progress of Giuliani's bankruptcy case, noting Giuliani's focus on appealing the defamation judgment. Giuliani filed for Chapter 11 in December following the defamation ruling. His legal team is from Berger, Fischoff, Shumer, Wexler & Goodman LLP, while the committee of unsecured creditors is represented by Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.Giuliani Moves to Liquidate Assets to Pay $148 Million Debt (1)Donald Trump is seeking to overturn his New York hush-money conviction following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that grants him some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while president. Trump's lawyers have taken initial steps to request that the New York judge, Juan Merchan, set aside the jury's verdict, and propose delaying his sentencing to allow for briefing and arguments.The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision earlier stated that former presidents have immunity from prosecution for many official acts, reversing lower-court rulings and potentially influencing Trump's New York case. While two judges previously rejected Trump's immunity claims before this ruling, the decision could impact other legal proceedings against him.Trump's conviction involves 34 counts of falsifying business records related to payments made by his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to adult-film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election. Prosecutors argued Trump reimbursed Cohen with payments falsely recorded as legal services. Despite Trump's defense, the jury found the payments were intended to silence Daniels about an affair, not for legitimate legal work.The Supreme Court ruling could also affect other cases against Trump, including federal charges related to the 2020 election and classified documents. The legal landscape for Trump remains complex and dynamic as he navigates multiple legal challenges.Trump Seeks to Toss NY Felony Conviction After Immunity Win (1)The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision on presidential immunity leaves Judge Tanya Chutkan with the challenging task of determining the extent of immunity Donald Trump has in his federal criminal case related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. The Court's 6-3 ruling affirmed that Trump has broad protection from prosecution for actions within his official duties as president. Judge Chutkan must now assess which actions fall under this protection and which do not, significantly impacting the four-count indictment brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.This complex evaluation includes analyzing Trump's public statements before the January 6 Capitol attack and his attempts to organize alternate electors. Additionally, Chutkan will decide if prosecutors can overcome the presumption of immunity regarding Trump's pressure on then-Vice President Mike Pence. The Supreme Court's ruling suggests these communications are considered official acts.The process will delay the trial, originally scheduled for March, potentially pushing it beyond the November 5 presidential election where Trump is the Republican candidate. Chutkan, known for her no-nonsense approach, has previously shown little tolerance for delays and has a history of imposing strict sentences on Capitol rioters. Trump's legal team plans to appeal any unfavorable rulings, which could further prolong proceedings.Chutkan's previous ruling in December 2023 rejected Trump's broad immunity claims, but the new Supreme Court guidelines require her to reassess this stance. Additionally, a separate Supreme Court decision last week raised the bar for federal obstruction charges, directly affecting two of the four counts against Trump. The outcome of these legal challenges will set a significant precedent for future presidential immunity cases.US Supreme Court leaves Judge Tanya Chutkan to parse Trump immunity | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Standard Oil DissolvedOn this day in legal history, May 15, 1911, the United States Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision that significantly altered the landscape of American business practices. The case in question was Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States, where the Court found Standard Oil guilty of monopolistic practices in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This Act, passed in 1890, was designed to combat anti-competitive practices, reduce market domination by individual corporations, and preserve fair competition.The decision to break up John D. Rockefeller's oil empire was pivotal in the enforcement of antitrust laws in the United States. The Court's ruling declared that Standard Oil had restrained trade and maintained monopolistic power through unfair and unethical business practices, including predatory pricing and collusive dealings. The verdict mandated the dissolution of Standard Oil into 34 independent companies, some of which have since evolved into major players in today's oil industry, such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips.The significance of this ruling extended beyond the immediate impact on Standard Oil. It set a precedent for the interpretation of the Sherman Act, introducing the "rule of reason" doctrine. This doctrine asserts that only those combinations and contracts that unreasonably restrain trade are subject to actions under the antitrust laws. This nuanced approach allowed for greater flexibility in the application of the law, acknowledging that some business combinations might enhance competition.The case also highlighted the growing public and governmental concern over the power wielded by large corporations, which led to increased regulation and oversight over monopolies. The ruling was a crucial step in defining the boundaries of lawful conduct for businesses, emphasizing that large size and monopoly were not inherently illegal, but that harmful, anti-competitive practices would not be tolerated.The Standard Oil decision remains one of the most important in the annals of American legal and economic history, symbolizing the struggle between corporate power and public interest. It underscores the ongoing challenges and complexities of balancing economic power with the need to preserve free market competition, a concept still very much at the heart of American antitrust enforcement today.The bankruptcy case of Rudolph Giuliani, managed by Judge Sean H. Lane, is facing significant delays, primarily due to Giuliani's challenges against a $148 million defamation judgment. At a recent hearing, Judge Lane expressed his concern over the slow progress and considered major changes to expedite the case. Giuliani has failed to meet deadlines for submitting required financial disclosures, and his legal team reported difficulties in obtaining necessary information from him.The possibility of appointing a trustee to oversee the case or dismissing it entirely was discussed by creditors' lawyers. Additionally, Giuliani's focus on appealing the defamation judgment—related to false accusations made against two Georgia poll workers—has hindered advancements in other aspects of his bankruptcy proceedings. This focus on the appeal has also been criticized for potentially causing indefinite delays. The financial strain is evident as Giuliani has not made moves to sell his properties or settle the defamation judgment, which prompted his Chapter 11 filing. The situation is further complicated by recent derogatory remarks Giuliani made on his radio show, resulting in his suspension. Concerns about the case's stagnation were also voiced by the Justice Department's bankruptcy watchdog, indicating minimal reorganizational activity. The judge has yet to make a decision regarding Giuliani's request to hire special litigation counsel, given the lack of progress on the appeal.Giuliani Bankruptcy Nears Turning Point as Judge Rues Slow PaceLandlords in the commercial real estate sector are bracing for further challenges as an increasing number of retailers file for bankruptcy amidst persistent economic difficulties. The recent Chapter 11 filings by companies such as teen clothing retailer rue21, Express Inc., and Joann Inc. are indicative of the broader issues facing retailers, including high inflation and rising interest rates. While companies like rue21 are opting for liquidation, others like Express are using bankruptcy proceedings to shed unprofitable leases and attempt a turnaround.Bankruptcy laws enable retailers to terminate leases relatively inexpensively, which has become a critical tool for distressed businesses looking to streamline operations. This trend has led to landlords frequently engaging in bankruptcy cases, with larger landlords often having more influence and even purchasing companies out of bankruptcy to maintain continuity in mall spaces.The economic backdrop for these bankruptcies includes the lingering effects of the Covid-19 pandemic, which initially pushed retailers like J.C. Penney and Neiman Marcus into bankruptcy in 2020. Current economic pressures such as inflation and higher interest rates have exacerbated the situation, making it difficult for retailers to pass increased costs onto consumers who are also feeling the financial pinch.For instance, rue21 has been particularly impacted, with its core customer base facing significant financial stress due to inflation. Joann has struggled with increased costs from tariffs on Chinese imports and rising interest expenses, which have doubled in the past two years due to higher interest rates. These challenges are prompting concerns that more businesses may face bankruptcy as the benefits of previous federal aid diminish and the costs of refinancing grow under the current economic conditions.Retail Bankruptcies Pose Pain for Landlords as Headwinds PersistIn Delaware, the corporate legal community is divided over a proposed legislative response to a court decision that challenged long-standing corporate strategies involving stockholder agreements. This legislative move, viewed by some as an overreaction, aims to counteract a February ruling by Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster, which curtailed the powers granted to founders and certain investors through stockholder agreements in corporate governance. Critics argue that the rush to amend the law could undermine legal coherence and bypass the appellate process, potentially leading to a loss of confidence in Delaware as a prime jurisdiction for corporate charters.Meanwhile, Elon Musk has been ordered by a U.S. federal court to provide further testimony in the Securities and Exchange Commission's investigation into his acquisition of Twitter. The investigation examines whether Musk violated federal securities laws during his takeover of the social media company. This court decision continues a longstanding conflict between Musk and the SEC, which includes previous disputes over Musk's communications about his business ventures. The SEC's ongoing scrutiny of Musk's actions reflects its role in overseeing transparency and legality in corporate executives' maneuvers in the securities markets.Elon Musk ordered to testify again in US SEC probe of Twitter takeover | ReutersMove to Change Delaware Law After Musk Attacks Called Knee-JerkDuring the hush money trial of former President Donald Trump, his former fixer Michael Cohen was subjected to intense scrutiny by Trump's defense attorneys. They aimed to discredit his testimony, highlighting his transformation from a staunch Trump supporter to a harsh critic, and questioning his motivations, suggesting they were driven by financial gain and revenge. Cohen, having already testified for approximately nine hours, claimed that Trump had directed him to pay adult film star Stormy Daniels to prevent her from disclosing an alleged encounter that could harm his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump's lawyers did not focus on the $130,000 payment directly but instead on Cohen's credibility, citing his previous prison sentence for related offenses and his admitted history of lying under oath.During his testimony, Cohen highlighted several key points:* Cohen claimed that Trump had given him the green light to proceed with the payment to Daniels, emphasizing that Trump saw the $130,000 as trivial compared to his wealth, and urged Cohen to just make the payment.* Cohen depicted the payment as a crisis for Trump's 2016 campaign, asserting that Trump believed the disclosure of Daniels' story would be disastrous, particularly because he was already polling poorly with women voters.* In discussions about how the payment might affect his marriage, Trump indicated to Cohen that he was not concerned about the potential impact on his relationship with Melania Trump, suggesting his focus was solely on the electoral implications.* Prosecutors played a recording where Trump can be heard discussing the payment method for a related silence agreement involving Playboy model Karen McDougal, which supports allegations of a "catch and kill" strategy used to suppress damaging stories during the campaign.* Cohen also recounted a meeting with Trump at the White House where Trump reassured him about the financial arrangements for covering the payment to Daniels.The trial, which has been ongoing since April 15, saw Cohen as the prosecution's final witness, with his cross-examination set to continue. The defense presented evidence of Cohen's financial endeavors post-allegations, including profits from memoirs and a podcast critical of Trump, as well as Trump-themed merchandise he sold online. The case hinges on accusations that Trump falsified business records to disguise reimbursements to Cohen for the hush money as legal fees, contributing to the 34 counts he faces. Trump, who has pleaded not guilty, denies any encounter with Daniels and claims the case is politically motivated. The trial also includes a backdrop of Trump defending Cohen publicly, even as federal investigations closed in, which Cohen described as part of a "pressure campaign" to keep him aligned with Trump. This case is one of several legal challenges Trump faces, with others involving allegations of trying to overturn the 2020 election results and mishandling classified documents.Trump's lawyers assail estranged fixer Michael Cohen's credibility at hush money trial | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Who bombed Wall Street? Why was all the evidence swept away literally overnight? Trent Edwards and Steve Fait are joined by Scott Borden for a bombing-inspired improv set that may include a nitroglycerine chaser for meatloaf. Trent and Steve then interview history expert Randy Baker about what actually happened. Further Book Smarts Inspired By This Episode The Wall Street Bombing of 1920 rocked the financial district of Manhattan, New York City, on Sep. 16, 1920 at 12:01 p.m. Its investigation was handled by the predecessor to the FBI. John Pierpont “Jack” or “JP” Morgan Jr. (Sep. 7, 1867 – March 13, 1943) was heir to the JP Morgan fortune and head of JP Morgan & Co. after the death of his father in 1913. William Hammond Remick (Oct. 14, 1866 – March 9, 1922) was president of the New York Stock Exchange during the 1920 Wall Street bombing.  Mario Buda (Oct. 13, 1883 – June 1, 1963) was an Italian anarchist with the militant American Galleanists in the late 1910s.  The 1920 World Series was actually played three weeks after the Wall Street Bombing, with the Cleveland Indians beating the Brooklyn Robins. The Wall Street Panic of 1893, (May-Nov. 1893) included a run on currency, and closures of banks and businesses who didn't have cash to pay their workers. Laissez-faire Capitalism in American History — Laissez-faire capitalism, where the government plays a minimal role in the economy, dominated the Gilded Age. The US Federal Government was lax in its regulation of the stock market throughout the 1920s before the legendary crash of 1929. Before the stock market crash of 1929, stocks quadrupled in value during the 1920s. Congress gave women the right to vote in August, 1920, when it ratified the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution. The Progressive Era c. 1896–1917 featured widespread social activism and political reform across the US to combat corruption, monopoly, waste, and inefficiency.  Trust-busting — Trust-busting was meant to break the near monopolies of major corporations in the Gilded Age. By 1928, 24% of the nation's wealth was held by just 1% of the population. President Theodore Roosevelt earned the nickname of the Trust Buster President, initiating the era of Trust Busting by enforcing the Sherman Antitrust Act. In 2023, more than one-quarter of all household wealth, 26.5%, belonged to Americans who earn enough money to rank in the top percentile by income, according to Federal Reserve statistics through mid-2023. Anybody seen Teddy Roosevelt lately?

Few organizations throughout history have exceeded the modern American mega-corporation when it comes to gathering money, power, and influence. The question becomes, are they so dominant as to be called a “Monopoly?” The term “monopoly” is a tricky one. In the United States, we like to define “monopoly” in the legal sense. Something is a “monopoly” if the law says it's a “monopoly.” We rely on a 134-year-old law named the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Few organizations throughout history have exceeded the modern American mega-corporation when it comes to gathering money, power, and influence. The question becomes, are they so dominant as to be called a “Monopoly?” The term “monopoly” is a tricky one. In the United States, we like to define “monopoly” in the legal sense. Something is a “monopoly” if the law says it's a “monopoly.” We rely on a 134-year-old law named the Sherman Antitrust Act.

In this week's episode, the gang discusses the DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple, the upcoming WWDC 2024 in June, Apple's chip vulnerability, and Tim Cook's goodwill tour in China. The panel also shares their thoughts on NAB 2024, Nikon's acquisition of RED, Canva's purchase of Affinity, and a recent auction of vintage Apple memorabilia. US Department of Justice and 18 state attorneys general sue Apple for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that Apple maintains an unlawful monopoly. The panel breaks down the DOJ's 88-page complaint, discussing its merits, challenges, and potential outcomes Apple announces the dates for WWDC 2024 (June 10-14), with the panel speculating on potential AI announcements and updates to iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 Mark Gurman's reports on the delay of new iPads due to software issues An unpatchable vulnerability in Apple Silicon chips that can leak secret encryption keys, with the panel discussing its implications and mitigations EU announces investigations into Apple, Meta, and Alphabet under the Digital Markets Act, focusing on the App Store and restrictions on developers Nikon acquires RED Digital Cinema, with Alex Lindsay providing insight into the camera industry and the potential impact of the acquisition Canva acquires Serif, the makers of Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher, raising questions about the future of the Affinity suite Tim Cook's visit to China to announce a new Shanghai store and meet with developers and companies, as well as his commitment to launch the Vision Pro headset in China by the end of the year Steve Jobs and Apple memorabilia fetch high prices at auction, including a signed business card and a handwritten check Picks of the Week: Andy: STEVE! (martin) a documentary in 2 pieces - a two-part documentary about the comedian's life and career, premiering on Apple TV+ on March 29th Jason: HomeControl Menu for HomeKit - a Mac menu bar app that allows users to control their home devices without opening the Home app Alex: Nuphy Air96 - a mechanical keyboard which offers a great typing experience and customization options Hosts: Leo Laporte, Alex Lindsay, Andy Ihnatko, and Jason Snell Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: zscaler.com/zerotrustAI Download StressFace robinhood.com/boost zocdoc.com/macbreak cachefly.com/twit

In this week's episode, the gang discusses the DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple, the upcoming WWDC 2024 in June, Apple's chip vulnerability, and Tim Cook's goodwill tour in China. The panel also shares their thoughts on NAB 2024, Nikon's acquisition of RED, Canva's purchase of Affinity, and a recent auction of vintage Apple memorabilia. US Department of Justice and 18 state attorneys general sue Apple for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that Apple maintains an unlawful monopoly. The panel breaks down the DOJ's 88-page complaint, discussing its merits, challenges, and potential outcomes Apple announces the dates for WWDC 2024 (June 10-14), with the panel speculating on potential AI announcements and updates to iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 Mark Gurman's reports on the delay of new iPads due to software issues An unpatchable vulnerability in Apple Silicon chips that can leak secret encryption keys, with the panel discussing its implications and mitigations EU announces investigations into Apple, Meta, and Alphabet under the Digital Markets Act, focusing on the App Store and restrictions on developers Nikon acquires RED Digital Cinema, with Alex Lindsay providing insight into the camera industry and the potential impact of the acquisition Canva acquires Serif, the makers of Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher, raising questions about the future of the Affinity suite Tim Cook's visit to China to announce a new Shanghai store and meet with developers and companies, as well as his commitment to launch the Vision Pro headset in China by the end of the year Steve Jobs and Apple memorabilia fetch high prices at auction, including a signed business card and a handwritten check Picks of the Week: Andy: STEVE! (martin) a documentary in 2 pieces - a two-part documentary about the comedian's life and career, premiering on Apple TV+ on March 29th Jason: HomeControl Menu for HomeKit - a Mac menu bar app that allows users to control their home devices without opening the Home app Alex: Nuphy Air96 - a mechanical keyboard which offers a great typing experience and customization options Hosts: Leo Laporte, Alex Lindsay, Andy Ihnatko, and Jason Snell Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: zscaler.com/zerotrustAI Download StressFace robinhood.com/boost zocdoc.com/macbreak cachefly.com/twit

In this week's episode, the gang discusses the DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple, the upcoming WWDC 2024 in June, Apple's chip vulnerability, and Tim Cook's goodwill tour in China. The panel also shares their thoughts on NAB 2024, Nikon's acquisition of RED, Canva's purchase of Affinity, and a recent auction of vintage Apple memorabilia. US Department of Justice and 18 state attorneys general sue Apple for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that Apple maintains an unlawful monopoly. The panel breaks down the DOJ's 88-page complaint, discussing its merits, challenges, and potential outcomes Apple announces the dates for WWDC 2024 (June 10-14), with the panel speculating on potential AI announcements and updates to iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 Mark Gurman's reports on the delay of new iPads due to software issues An unpatchable vulnerability in Apple Silicon chips that can leak secret encryption keys, with the panel discussing its implications and mitigations EU announces investigations into Apple, Meta, and Alphabet under the Digital Markets Act, focusing on the App Store and restrictions on developers Nikon acquires RED Digital Cinema, with Alex Lindsay providing insight into the camera industry and the potential impact of the acquisition Canva acquires Serif, the makers of Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher, raising questions about the future of the Affinity suite Tim Cook's visit to China to announce a new Shanghai store and meet with developers and companies, as well as his commitment to launch the Vision Pro headset in China by the end of the year Steve Jobs and Apple memorabilia fetch high prices at auction, including a signed business card and a handwritten check Picks of the Week: Andy: STEVE! (martin) a documentary in 2 pieces - a two-part documentary about the comedian's life and career, premiering on Apple TV+ on March 29th Jason: HomeControl Menu for HomeKit - a Mac menu bar app that allows users to control their home devices without opening the Home app Alex: Nuphy Air96 - a mechanical keyboard which offers a great typing experience and customization options Hosts: Leo Laporte, Alex Lindsay, Andy Ihnatko, and Jason Snell Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: zscaler.com/zerotrustAI Download StressFace robinhood.com/boost zocdoc.com/macbreak cachefly.com/twit

In this week's episode, the gang discusses the DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple, the upcoming WWDC 2024 in June, Apple's chip vulnerability, and Tim Cook's goodwill tour in China. The panel also shares their thoughts on NAB 2024, Nikon's acquisition of RED, Canva's purchase of Affinity, and a recent auction of vintage Apple memorabilia. US Department of Justice and 18 state attorneys general sue Apple for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that Apple maintains an unlawful monopoly. The panel breaks down the DOJ's 88-page complaint, discussing its merits, challenges, and potential outcomes Apple announces the dates for WWDC 2024 (June 10-14), with the panel speculating on potential AI announcements and updates to iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 Mark Gurman's reports on the delay of new iPads due to software issues An unpatchable vulnerability in Apple Silicon chips that can leak secret encryption keys, with the panel discussing its implications and mitigations EU announces investigations into Apple, Meta, and Alphabet under the Digital Markets Act, focusing on the App Store and restrictions on developers Nikon acquires RED Digital Cinema, with Alex Lindsay providing insight into the camera industry and the potential impact of the acquisition Canva acquires Serif, the makers of Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher, raising questions about the future of the Affinity suite Tim Cook's visit to China to announce a new Shanghai store and meet with developers and companies, as well as his commitment to launch the Vision Pro headset in China by the end of the year Steve Jobs and Apple memorabilia fetch high prices at auction, including a signed business card and a handwritten check Picks of the Week: Andy: STEVE! (martin) a documentary in 2 pieces - a two-part documentary about the comedian's life and career, premiering on Apple TV+ on March 29th Jason: HomeControl Menu for HomeKit - a Mac menu bar app that allows users to control their home devices without opening the Home app Alex: Nuphy Air96 - a mechanical keyboard which offers a great typing experience and customization options Hosts: Leo Laporte, Alex Lindsay, Andy Ihnatko, and Jason Snell Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: zscaler.com/zerotrustAI Download StressFace robinhood.com/boost zocdoc.com/macbreak cachefly.com/twit

In this week's episode, the gang discusses the DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple, the upcoming WWDC 2024 in June, Apple's chip vulnerability, and Tim Cook's goodwill tour in China. The panel also shares their thoughts on NAB 2024, Nikon's acquisition of RED, Canva's purchase of Affinity, and a recent auction of vintage Apple memorabilia. US Department of Justice and 18 state attorneys general sue Apple for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that Apple maintains an unlawful monopoly. The panel breaks down the DOJ's 88-page complaint, discussing its merits, challenges, and potential outcomes Apple announces the dates for WWDC 2024 (June 10-14), with the panel speculating on potential AI announcements and updates to iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 Mark Gurman's reports on the delay of new iPads due to software issues An unpatchable vulnerability in Apple Silicon chips that can leak secret encryption keys, with the panel discussing its implications and mitigations EU announces investigations into Apple, Meta, and Alphabet under the Digital Markets Act, focusing on the App Store and restrictions on developers Nikon acquires RED Digital Cinema, with Alex Lindsay providing insight into the camera industry and the potential impact of the acquisition Canva acquires Serif, the makers of Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher, raising questions about the future of the Affinity suite Tim Cook's visit to China to announce a new Shanghai store and meet with developers and companies, as well as his commitment to launch the Vision Pro headset in China by the end of the year Steve Jobs and Apple memorabilia fetch high prices at auction, including a signed business card and a handwritten check Picks of the Week: Andy: STEVE! (martin) a documentary in 2 pieces - a two-part documentary about the comedian's life and career, premiering on Apple TV+ on March 29th Jason: HomeControl Menu for HomeKit - a Mac menu bar app that allows users to control their home devices without opening the Home app Alex: Nuphy Air96 - a mechanical keyboard which offers a great typing experience and customization options Hosts: Leo Laporte, Alex Lindsay, Andy Ihnatko, and Jason Snell Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: zscaler.com/zerotrustAI Download StressFace robinhood.com/boost zocdoc.com/macbreak cachefly.com/twit

In this week's episode, the gang discusses the DOJ antitrust lawsuit against Apple, the upcoming WWDC 2024 in June, Apple's chip vulnerability, and Tim Cook's goodwill tour in China. The panel also shares their thoughts on NAB 2024, Nikon's acquisition of RED, Canva's purchase of Affinity, and a recent auction of vintage Apple memorabilia. US Department of Justice and 18 state attorneys general sue Apple for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that Apple maintains an unlawful monopoly. The panel breaks down the DOJ's 88-page complaint, discussing its merits, challenges, and potential outcomes Apple announces the dates for WWDC 2024 (June 10-14), with the panel speculating on potential AI announcements and updates to iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 Mark Gurman's reports on the delay of new iPads due to software issues An unpatchable vulnerability in Apple Silicon chips that can leak secret encryption keys, with the panel discussing its implications and mitigations EU announces investigations into Apple, Meta, and Alphabet under the Digital Markets Act, focusing on the App Store and restrictions on developers Nikon acquires RED Digital Cinema, with Alex Lindsay providing insight into the camera industry and the potential impact of the acquisition Canva acquires Serif, the makers of Affinity Photo, Designer, and Publisher, raising questions about the future of the Affinity suite Tim Cook's visit to China to announce a new Shanghai store and meet with developers and companies, as well as his commitment to launch the Vision Pro headset in China by the end of the year Steve Jobs and Apple memorabilia fetch high prices at auction, including a signed business card and a handwritten check Picks of the Week: Andy: STEVE! (martin) a documentary in 2 pieces - a two-part documentary about the comedian's life and career, premiering on Apple TV+ on March 29th Jason: HomeControl Menu for HomeKit - a Mac menu bar app that allows users to control their home devices without opening the Home app Alex: Nuphy Air96 - a mechanical keyboard which offers a great typing experience and customization options Hosts: Leo Laporte, Alex Lindsay, Andy Ihnatko, and Jason Snell Download or subscribe to this show at https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly. Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: zscaler.com/zerotrustAI Download StressFace robinhood.com/boost zocdoc.com/macbreak cachefly.com/twit

A new week means new questions! Hope you have fun with these!Which European country's flag holds the wolrd record of being the oldest continously used national flag in the world?What is the name of the sequel to the pulitzer prize winning novel "Less"?Between which two countries was the Pig War fought on San Juan Island in 1859?What percentage of mammals are bats? We will give you 5% on either side.Bruce Springsteen's album Born in the U.S.A. has an image of Bruce Springsteen's butt in jeans and has what object in his back pocket?What is the term for 126 gallons of wine?Contuing on to this day with Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and Conoco, what sprawling company was co-founded by John D. Rockefeller and was broken up in 1911 under the Sherman Antitrust Act?What do the letters VHS stand for?In which part of the body are the deltoid muscles?What well-known fast food comes in four shapes: the boot, the bell, the ball, and the bone (or bow-tie)?Which two countries of the Middle East both share a border with Israel and Iraq?MusicHot Swing, Fast Talkin, Bass Walker, Dances and Dames, Ambush by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/Don't forget to follow us on social media:Patreon – patreon.com/quizbang – Please consider supporting us on Patreon. Check out our fun extras for patrons and help us keep this podcast going. We appreciate any level of support!Website – quizbangpod.com Check out our website, it will have all the links for social media that you need and while you're there, why not go to the contact us page and submit a question!Facebook – @quizbangpodcast – we post episode links and silly lego pictures to go with our trivia questions. Enjoy the silly picture and give your best guess, we will respond to your answer the next day to give everyone a chance to guess.Instagram – Quiz Quiz Bang Bang (quizquizbangbang), we post silly lego pictures to go with our trivia questions. Enjoy the silly picture and give your best guess, we will respond to your answer the next day to give everyone a chance to guess.Twitter – @quizbangpod We want to start a fun community for our fellow trivia lovers. If you hear/think of a fun or challenging trivia question, post it to our twitter feed and we will repost it so everyone can take a stab it. Come for the trivia – stay for the trivia.Ko-Fi – ko-fi.com/quizbangpod – Keep that sweet caffeine running through our body with a Ko-Fi, power us through a late night of fact checking and editing!

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 1117, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: Forget U 1: Forget the "U" in this synonym for "abode" and you get this stocking. house and hose. 2: Drop the "U" from this float used to mark a navigational channel to get this male word. buoy and boy. 3: Dropping the "U" from this synonym for "leap" gives you this uniting force. bound and bond. 4: This verb meaning "to recommend" becomes this word for a small child when it loses its "U". tout and tot. 5: This, the worth or merit of something, loses its "U" to become this mortal life, like the one "of tears". value and vale. Round 2. Category: Country 1: This country's coat of arms has 3 stars for its 3 main island groups, an eagle for the U.S. and and a lion representing Spain. the Philippines. 2: In October 2002 this late rocker's "30 #1 Hits" CD debuted at the top of the country charts. Elvis Presley. 3: It's where you'll find Kerry's lovely lakes of Killarney. Ireland. 4: He won a 1967 Grammy for "Gentle on My Mind", which later became the theme song to his TV series. Glen Campbell. 5: In 2005 Lech Kaczynski became the president of this country. Poland. Round 3. Category: Other Christmas Songs 1: In 1942 this crooner had a No. 1 hit with "White Christmas". Bing Crosby. 2: This title line is followed by "underneath the mistletoe last night". "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus". 3: His "Christmas Album" of 1957 includes the now classic "Blue Christmas". Elvis Presley. 4: It's the alternate title and first line of "The Christmas Song", definitively sung by Nat King Cole. "Chestnuts Roasting On An Open Fire". 5: In 2014 Bob Geldof re-recorded this 30-year-old song as a fundraiser to fight Ebola. "Do They Know It's Christmas?". Round 4. Category: Write Foot 1: Beginning readers may learn about trick feet and sick feet in "The Foot Book" by this author whose real name was Theodor Geisel. Dr. Seuss. 2: In this Grimm tale, one sister cuts off a toe to fit into a golden shoe; the other, part of her heel; the title girl, a perfect fit!. Cinderella. 3: After landing in Oz, Dorothy is dismayed to see this woman's lifeless feet "shod in silver shoes with pointed toes". the Wicked Witch of the East. 4: In Fulgentius' "Mythologies", the goddess Thetis douses this babe in the River Styx, "his heel alone she did not dip". Achilles. 5: Artist Christy Brown wrote in this autobiography that he was "living in chains" battling cerebral palsy. My Left Foot. Round 5. Category: The Age Of The Robber Barons 1: In 1890 he became president of the American Tobacco Company in Durham, North Carolina. (James Buchanan) Duke. 2: Henry Frick made a fortune supplying the Pittsburgh steel industry with this product made from heating pulverized coal. coke. 3: The "P." in the name of this preeminent banker of the Gilded Age stood for Pierpont, his mother's family. (J.P.) Morgan. 4: 5 years after this act was passed, the Supreme Court gutted it in 1895's United States v. E.C. Knight. the Sherman Antitrust Act. 5: Montana's Marcus Daly owned this, the USA's richest copper mine, as well as the town named for it. Anaconda. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/ AI Voices used

Tennessee is under NCAA investigation. Again.  This time, the investigation involves potential violations to the NCAA's flimsy NIL guidelines. And, this time, Tennessee is fighting back.  UT Chancellor Donde Plowman has her elbows sharpened for this fight, and so does Vols AD Danny White. Perhaps more importantly, the Tennessee attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, is suing the NCAA. The lawsuit alleges that the NCAA's NIL guidelines violate the Sherman Antitrust Act and unlawfully restrict athletes' ability to monetize their name, image and likeness. On today's episode, hosts Blake Toppmeyer, Adam Sparks and John Adams unpack the investigation and the lawsuit and what they could mean – for the Vols and the NCAA. This investigation comes on the heels of a separate investigation in which the NCAA determined 18 Level I violations occurred during Jeremy Pruitt's coaching tenure. If the NCAA finds that Tennessee committed NIL violations, it may intend to impose harsh penalties, because the Vols would be a repeat offender. However, the NCAA routinely loses in court, and if it loses the judgement in this lawsuit, that could further hamstring the NCAA's ability to enforce its NIL guidelines. Stay connected on Twitter with Blake (@btoppmeyer) Adam (@AdamSparks) Mike (@ByMikeWilson) and John (@JohnAdamsKNS) and stay up to date on Vols sports news by following @GoVolsXtra. Connect on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/GoVolsXtra/ Subscribe to KnoxNews: knoxnews.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Standard Oil Incorporated On this day in legal history, January 10 marks the incorporation of Standard Oil by John D. Rockefeller in 1870. This event set the stage for one of the most significant antitrust legal battles in American history. Standard Oil, under Rockefeller's leadership, quickly grew to dominate the U.S. oil industry, achieving near-monopoly status.The company's growth was characterized by aggressive strategies, such as undercutting competitors' prices, securing favorable railroad rates, and acquiring rival refineries. By the 1880s, Standard Oil controlled approximately 90% of the U.S. refining capacity, prompting public and legal scrutiny.Concerns about Standard Oil's monopoly power and business tactics contributed to the development of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, a landmark federal statute in the field of competition law. The Act aimed to prohibit monopolistic practices and promote fair competition.In 1906, the federal government filed a lawsuit against Standard Oil under the Sherman Act. The case, Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey vs. United States, reached the Supreme Court. The Court's 1911 decision became a cornerstone of antitrust jurisprudence.The Supreme Court, in a landmark ruling, found Standard Oil guilty of monopolizing the petroleum industry through a series of abusive and anticompetitive actions. The Court ordered the dissolution of Standard Oil into 34 independent companies, including those that would become ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips.This case set a significant precedent for antitrust enforcement in the United States. It demonstrated the government's commitment to regulating large corporations and maintaining competitive markets. The ruling was also a pivotal moment in the history of corporate law, shaping the legal landscape for future antitrust cases.The rise and fall of Standard Oil not only transformed the oil industry but also had a lasting impact on American business practices and legal frameworks. Rockefeller, through this enterprise, became America's first billionaire, illustrating the profound economic impact of the industrial age.Today, the legacy of the Standard Oil case continues to influence antitrust law and policy, serving as a reminder of the legal system's role in balancing corporate power and public interest.The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) experienced a significant cybersecurity incident when its social media account was hacked. The compromised account falsely announced the approval of a spot-Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF), which led to a brief surge in Bitcoin's price. This incident has triggered an investigation by US authorities into the breach of one of Wall Street's main regulatory bodies.Kurt Gottschall, a former SEC regional director, commented on the irony of the situation, noting that the SEC, known for its strict stance on cybersecurity breaches in public companies, is now a victim itself. The hack has also intensified criticism from cryptocurrency advocates, who perceive the SEC's chair, Gary Gensler, as overly stringent on crypto regulations.The SEC confirmed that the unauthorized access was terminated and clarified that the post about the ETF approval was not made by the SEC or its staff. Joe Benarroch, head of business operations at the involved social media service, stated that they are investigating the root cause of the hack. It was revealed that the SEC's account did not have two-factor authentication enabled, a standard security measure, at the time of the incident.Republican Senators JD Vance and Thom Tillis have demanded explanations from the SEC regarding this misleading post, seeking a briefing and responses by January 23.Meanwhile, anticipation for the SEC's decision on several Bitcoin ETF applications is high. The SEC is due to act on these applications, with speculation about possible approval for these products. The approval process involves signing off on exchange filings and the issuers' registration applications, with potential for the ETFs to start trading soon after approval.This incident underscores the ongoing controversy and speculation surrounding the introduction of spot-backed Bitcoin ETFs, an area where the SEC has historically expressed concerns over investor protection and market manipulation.SEC's X Account Hacked to Falsely Say Bitcoin ETF Approved (3)In 2023, U.S. law firms saw a significant milestone with women associates outnumbering their male counterparts for the first time. According to a survey by the National Association for Law Placement (NALP), 50.3% of associates in U.S. law firms were women last year. This shift reflects the growing gender dynamics in the legal profession, as the number of women in U.S. law schools has been surpassing men for the past eight years, with nearly 56% of current J.D. students being women.Since NALP began tracking diversity data in 1991, when women comprised just over 38% of law firm associates, there has been a gradual but notable increase in their representation. Nikia Gray, NALP's executive director, emphasizes that real change is slow and hard, but it does happen. However, the increase in women's representation is not uniform across all levels in law firms. While women made up 27.76% of all partners in 2023, the largest year-over-year increase recorded by NALP, they still represent less than half the percentage of female associates, highlighting a significant gender gap at higher levels.The survey also indicates improvements in racial diversity within law firms. In 2023, associates of color represented 30.15%, a record increase, and non-white partners increased to 12.1%. Despite these gains, women of color still account for less than 5% of all partners, although Black and Latina women surpassed 1% of partners for the first time in 2023.However, there's a potential concern for future diversity as the percentage of minority students in summer associate internships dropped in 2023 for the first time since 2017. This decline might signal a slowdown in the diversity shift among associates, considering the role of summer programs as a pipeline to full-time positions in law firms.Most US law firm associates were women in 2023, survey shows | ReutersSteve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Inc., is challenging the limits of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in a case against YouTube. This federal law acts as a liability shield for online platforms from lawsuits regarding third-party content. The case, argued before California's Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal, centers on YouTube's role in a scam involving doctored footage of Wozniak and other tech figures to promote a fake Bitcoin giveaway.Wozniak's legal team argues that YouTube contributed to the scam's credibility by awarding verification badges, indicated by check marks, to accounts that posted the fraudulent videos. These badges are typically seen as symbols of authenticity. The justices are probing whether these badges, requested by users, constitute YouTube's own content or are simply enhancements of third-party content, which would then be protected under Section 230.YouTube's attorney, Mark Yohalem, referenced a precedent case, Gentry v. eBay, Inc., to argue that platforms are not liable for labels like “power sellers” given to third-party users, drawing a parallel to YouTube's verification badges. Yohalem asserts that promoting visibility of third-party content falls under the definition of publishing, and hence, is protected under Section 230.Wozniak's attorney, Brian Danitz, contends that YouTube's profit from the hoax should exclude it from Section 230's liability shield. He also seeks to investigate YouTube's processes for creating targeted ads and verification badges.The case, Wozniak v. YouTube, highlights a growing debate among federal appellate judges and justices over the expansive interpretations of Section 230, which was originally intended to foster internet growth. This lawsuit also involves the misuse of videos of other celebrities like Elon Musk and Bill Gates in the hoax. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the liability of online platforms in cases of third-party content misuse.If you have any interest in learning more about Section 230, we have a separate Max Min episode on just that topic. Steve Wozniak Case Cues Test of Internet Liability Shield LimitThe first trial among dozens of activists charged with conspiring to halt the construction of an Atlanta police training center, commonly referred to as "Cop City," is set to commence. Ayla King, a 19-year-old from Worcester, Massachusetts, faces charges under Georgia's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a state law modeled after the federal law originally intended to combat organized crime.King is accused of being part of "Defend the Atlanta Forest," a group that has allegedly occupied the site of the proposed $90 million Atlanta Public Safety Training Center. This center, which includes a mock city and emergency vehicle course, is opposed by protesters for reasons including increased police militarization and environmental concerns.The case is notable as it's the first time Georgia has applied the RICO Act to a protest group, according to Chris Timmons, a law teacher at Georgia State University. He points out that prosecutors are wielding a powerful law that might transform some misdemeanors into more serious charges. If proven that the group's actions extended beyond protest to criminal activity, it could justify the use of the RICO Act.King, who has been released on a $15,000 bond and pleaded not guilty, is specifically charged with participating in a riot at the construction site. Her trial is separate as she requested a speedy trial, and her outcome won't directly affect the other cases, though it might influence plea deal negotiations.A gag order has been issued in the case, limiting public statements by defense attorneys and prosecutors. King's attorney argues that there is no evidence linking her to the group that damaged construction equipment.Christopher Bruce, policy director for the ACLU of Georgia, criticized the broad application of Georgia's RICO Act in this context, stating it was meant for organized crime and is now being used to target government dissenters. The trial is a significant test case for the use of the RICO Act against protest groups and has broader implications for how such laws are applied to social and environmental activism.First conspiracy trial over Atlanta 'Cop City' protests set to begin | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Eugene Debs Sentenced On December 15, 1894, a significant event unfolded in the annals of American labor history. Eugene V. Debs, a prominent labor leader and later a key figure in the American socialist movement, faced the legal consequences of his role in the Pullman railroad strike. The strike, which began in May 1894, was a pivotal moment in labor relations and marked a significant clash between workers' rights and corporate interests.The Pullman Strike had its roots in the economic depression of the 1890s. The Pullman Palace Car Company, known for manufacturing luxury railroad cars, drastically cut wages while maintaining high rents in the company town where workers lived. This led to widespread discontent and eventually, under the leadership of Debs and the American Railway Union (ARU), a massive strike that paralyzed rail traffic in the Midwest.The federal government's response to the strike was severe. It viewed the strike as a direct challenge to federal authority and the mail system, as many railroads carried mail. The government obtained an injunction against the strike leaders, invoking the Sherman Antitrust Act, traditionally used against monopolies, in an unprecedented manner against a labor union.Debs, refusing to comply with the injunction, was arrested and charged with conspiracy to obstruct mail delivery and interstate commerce. His trial brought national attention to the plight of the working class and the legal boundaries of labor disputes. On December 15, he was found guilty and sentenced to six months in prison.His imprisonment marked a turning point in his life and career. It was during his time in jail that Debs began to shift his views, moving from a more traditional labor leader to a dedicated socialist. He read extensively, including the works of Karl Marx, and emerged from prison a changed man, eventually running for President of the United States as a Socialist candidate multiple times.The Pullman Strike and Debs' subsequent trial and imprisonment highlighted the growing tensions in American society over industrialization, workers' rights, and corporate power. It also set precedents for the use of federal power in labor disputes and marked the beginning of a more militant phase in the American labor movement.Today, December 15, serves as a reminder of Eugene V. Debs' impact on labor history and the ongoing struggle for workers' rights. His dedication to improving the conditions of the working class and his transformation during his incarceration remain key chapters in the legal and labor history of the United States.California is taking proactive steps to enhance its deepfake protections, especially with the looming threat of these technologies in upcoming elections and their misuse in pornography. The state, a leader in anti-deepfake legislation since 2019, already has laws allowing victims of deepfakes to sue distributors. However, lawmakers, recognizing the rapid advancements in AI, are considering expanding these laws.The current legislation in California, spearheaded by Assemblymember Marc Berman, focuses on two areas: pornography and political elections. Both laws provide victims with legal recourse, but there's a growing consensus that more needs to be done. Assemblymember Gail Pellerin emphasizes the urgency, given the ease with which AI can spread misinformation.While these measures are seen as important, their enforcement and effectiveness have been questioned. Critics, like Brandie Nonnecke from UC Berkeley, argue that the laws don't prevent the initial harm caused by deepfakes. She points out the difficulty in enforcing the laws, such as the challenge of proving 'actual malice' in cases.A significant challenge to California's efforts is the potential conflict with federal law, particularly Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects social media platforms from liability for user-generated content. California's current law does not hold these platforms accountable for monitoring deepfakes, a stance that could change with new legislation.Any new laws will also need to navigate First Amendment concerns, especially regarding satire and parody. Drew Liebert of the California Institute for Technology and Democracy suggests reevaluating traditional interpretations of the First Amendment in light of AI's risks to democracy.Proposed solutions include outright bans on AI in political communications and stricter guidelines for identifying altered content. Nonnecke suggests that technical solutions exist for social media platforms to flag AI-generated content. Enforcement mechanisms in new bills could range from the threat of lawsuits to criminal penalties, a path other states have followed.Assemblymember Tri Ta proposed a bill criminalizing the distribution of sexual deepfake content, but it saw little progress. Meanwhile, Berman is considering legislation to strengthen the existing deepfake laws.As AI technology continues to evolve, California's approach to regulating deepfakes remains a critical issue, particularly with the 2024 election poised to be a significant test of these laws and their effectiveness in the face of advanced AI threats.California Looks to Boost Deepfake Protections Before ElectionsA U.S. federal judge has refused to block the U.S. Naval Academy's race-conscious admissions policy. This decision came after Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), a group opposing affirmative action, requested a preliminary injunction against the Naval Academy's consideration of race in admissions. The judge, Richard Bennett, appointed by former President George W. Bush, ruled that SFFA failed to demonstrate that the Academy's policy was discriminatory and violated the Fifth Amendment's equal protection rights.The judge's decision acknowledges the Supreme Court's June ruling, which invalidated similar admissions policies at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. However, the Supreme Court's decision contained an exemption for military academies, recognizing their potentially distinct interests. This exemption was a key factor in Judge Bennett's decision to reject SFFA's request.During the court proceedings, the U.S. Department of Justice argued that the military has valid reasons for considering race in admissions to ensure a diverse officer corps for an increasingly diverse armed force. The judge, with over 20 years of military service, cited the history of racial tensions in the military as a context for the current policy.The judge plans to issue a written ruling soon and expedite the trial on the merits of the case, anticipating that it could eventually reach the Supreme Court. SFFA's lawyer indicated a possible appeal, while Edward Blum, founder of SFFA, has not commented yet.The case highlights ongoing debates about race-conscious admissions policies in the U.S., particularly in military academies, and the Biden administration's defense of these policies as crucial for addressing the underrepresentation of minority officers in the military. The Naval Academy's current demographics show disparities in racial representation among officers, underscoring the policy's relevance.US judge won't block US Naval Academy's race-conscious admissions policy | ReutersElliott Portnoy, the CEO of Dentons, one of the world's largest law firms, has announced he will step down from his role in November next year. This decision marks a significant leadership change at the firm, which has experienced a period of aggressive international expansion and restructuring. Under Portnoy's tenure, Dentons has grown substantially through global mergers, including a notable combination with Chinese mega-firm Dacheng in 2015, which later ended due to new Chinese national security restrictions.Portnoy's departure follows other recent leadership changes at Dentons, including the replacement of the U.S. branch CEO and the retirement of the global chairman role. Despite losing about half of its attorneys after parting with its Chinese branch, Dentons has continued its expansion strategy, recently combining with Philippine law firm PJS Law to establish a presence in Southeast Asia.Dentons, which employs a Swiss verein business structure, allows its international branches to operate independently while sharing a common brand. Portnoy emphasized that his successor would need to be committed to the firm's global growth strategy, a key differentiator for Dentons in the legal market.The firm is currently in the process of hiring an executive search firm to identify Portnoy's replacement, considering both internal and external candidates. Despite the leadership transition, Dentons aims to maintain its strong performance and growth, particularly in the United States, where it has integrated several local and regional firms since 2020.Law firm Dentons' CEO to step down next year | ReutersThe 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston upheld the convictions of two former executives of Acclarent Inc, a medical device company now part of Johnson & Johnson. William Facteau, the ex-CEO, and Patrick Fabian, former vice president of sales, were found guilty of distributing a medical device for unapproved uses. The product in question was the Relieva Stratus MicroFlow Spacer, or Stratus, which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had only cleared for delivering saline after sinus surgery, not for delivering steroids as the executives promoted.Facteau and Fabian were convicted in 2016 on misdemeanor charges for introducing adulterated and misbranded medical devices into interstate commerce. However, they were acquitted of more serious felony fraud charges. Last year, they were fined $1 million and $500,000, respectively, following a four-year sentencing delay. Acclarent, acquired by J&J in 2010, had previously settled related civil claims for $18 million in 2016.On appeal, the defense argued that their convictions violated free speech and due process rights and were based on a misinterpretation of an FDA regulation about a device's "intended use." However, the court rejected these arguments, with U.S. Circuit Judge Kermit Lipez stating that the law was clear enough to indicate when distributing a device with an unapproved intended use would be criminally liable.Former medical device execs at J&J unit lose appeal of convictions | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This week's episode is a shorter take on a longer conversation lost to history (we're blaming Dan's COVID diagnosis).In this episode we discuss how Dan's work experience at this day job made him question how musicians and venues are always trying to leverage available data to ensure they're getting the best deals, and how bands should be more open to talking about what they make per gig.Thank you so much for tuning in!  If you want to help be sure to like, subscribe and share with your friends!  Linktree: linktr.ee/adampatrickjohnson                linktr.ee/coverbandconfidentialFollow us on Instagram!@coverbandconfidential@adampatrickjohnson@danraymusicianIf you have any questions please email at:Coverbandconfidential@gmail.comConsider supporting me on Patreon! www.patreon.com/coverbandconfidentialOr buy me a cup of coffee!paypal.me/cbconfidentialAnd for more info check out www.coverbandconfidential.com

Are buyer agents going away? Some think so, and some not. In this episode, we navigate the intricate maze of the antitrust lawsuits filed against the National Association of Realtors. In this journey, we promise you'll come away with a comprehensive understanding of the complexities of these lawsuits and their potential ripple effects on the real estate industry. Part of our discussion will reveal the controversies surrounding the buyer's agent commission and its lack of disclosure to sellers, all within the context of the Sherman Antitrust Act.As the plot thickens, we'll ponder the emerging trend of buyers taking the home search into their own hands. Could this signal a significant shift in commissions from the seller's agent to the buyer's agent, or even the phasing out of the buyer's agent entirely? We'll dissect the necessary changes this would impose on the Multiple Listing Service (MLS), and how this could shake up the market. Pulling the curtain back further, we'll debate the merits and drawbacks of employing an attorney who charges a flat fee. So, ready to unlock the mysteries of these landmark lawsuits and their potential implications for the home inspection estate industry? Then listen in!Check out our home inspection app at www.inspectortoolbelt.comNeed a home inspection website? See samples of our website at www.inspectortoolbelt.com/home-inspection-websites*The views and opinions expressed in this podcast, and the guests on it, do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Inspector Toolbelt and its associates.

Today on the flagship podcast of The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890:  01:43 - The Verge's David Pierce chats with policy editor Adi Robertson and reporter Makena Kelly about US v. Google, and what we've learned so far. They also talk about the FTC's lawsuit against Amazon, which could be the next big tech trial.  US v. Google antitrust trial: updates  Amazon reportedly used a secret algorithm to jack up prices Satya Nadella tells a court that Bing is worse than Google — and Apple could fix it Why the US is suing Amazon 28:46 - Later, senior correspondent Liz Lopatto joins the show to preview the trial of Sam Bankman-Fried, the former CEO of FTX. FTX's Sam Bankman-Fried is on trial for fraud and conspiracy 52:36 - Keep listening for this week's Vergecast hotline question with Alex Cranz. Email us at vergecast@theverge.com or call us at 866-VERGE11, we love hearing from you. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Google is currently being sued by the U.S. Department of Justice for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Not since they went after Microsoft in 1994 has there been such a major antitrust trial with such widespread implications - and never before has U.S. antitrust law been so tested. While it is not illegal to have a monopoly, it is illegal to stifle competition in order to keep one.  Google must now prove that it is the quality of their search product - not their statistically dominant position - that earns them widespread use, while the Federal government must demonstrate that Google has engaged in wilfully anticompetitive conduct.  In this week's episode of Dial P for Procurement, Kelly Barner looks at the details and competitive expectations playing out live in a Washington D.C. courtroom:  Providing a high level overview of the ongoing antitrust trial against Google  Contextualizing Google's actions and the DOJ's legal position using Michael Porter's Five Forces model Understanding the bar set by the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 for both sides in this court case Links: Kelly Barner on LinkedIn Dial P for Procurement on AOP Subscribe to This Week in Procurement

We have a fun this day in legal history entry for today, on this day, May 15, in 1911, the US Supreme Court ordered the dissolution of Standard Oil pursuant to the Sherman Antitrust Act, holding that Standard Oil's monopoly “unduly” restrained trade. The ruling resulted in breaking Standard Oil up into 34 independent companies. These companies became known as the "baby Standards." The breakup aimed to promote competition and prevent the concentration of economic power in a single entity.Among the prominent companies that emerged from the Standard Oil breakup were Exxon (formerly Standard Oil of New Jersey), Mobil (formerly Standard Oil of New York), Chevron (formerly Standard Oil of California), and Amoco (formerly Standard Oil of Indiana). These companies went on to become major players in the oil industry. Ultimately, they've merged back down in to 4. Perfect.President Joe Biden and congressional Republicans are engaged in critical debt-ceiling talks in an effort to reach a deal on spending levels and energy regulations to prevent a damaging default. While both sides are not close to an agreement, the White House has not ruled out the annual spending caps that Republicans insist on for any increase in the $31.4 trillion debt limit. Republicans, on the other hand, are not demanding conditions that the White House considers off-limits, such as repealing green-energy incentives in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. Energy regulations could potentially be an area of common ground. Biden expressed optimism about reaching a deal and meetings between staff from both sides were described as constructive. However, time is running out, with the United States projected to run out of money to pay its bills as early as June 1. A default would have severe economic consequences and worry investors and consumers. Republicans argue that there is still plenty of time for a deal to be reached. Biden has called for Congress to increase the borrowing capacity without conditions but has also indicated a willingness to discuss budget matters with Republicans. Republicans face pressure from former President Donald Trump, who suggested allowing the country to default unless all their demands are met. House Republicans previously passed legislation that combines a $1.5 trillion debt-ceiling hike with $4.8 trillion in spending cuts, but Democrats oppose certain elements of that legislation. However, they have not ruled out spending caps more generally. The White House and Republicans might also consider easing permitting requirements for energy infrastructure. The longer it takes to reach an agreement, the narrower the scope of the deal is expected to become.Biden, Republicans search for outline of debt-limit deal | ReutersXCast Labs, a Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) provider, has been sued by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for allegedly facilitating billions of illegal robocalls. The FTC is seeking a court order to compel the company to cease the practice. XCast is accused of assisting other companies, including one that falsely claimed to be a government entity, in contacting individuals on the National Do Not Call Registry and using deceptive tactics to persuade them to make purchases or contributions. The lawsuit requests unspecified penalties against XCast. The company has not yet provided a comment in response to the allegations. The case was filed by the Justice Department on behalf of the FTC in a California district court.Robocall company behind 'billions' of illegal calls sued by FTC | ReutersGoogle, a unit of Alphabet, has agreed to pay $8 million to settle claims made by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton that the company used deceptive advertisements to promote its Pixel 4 smartphone. The allegations stated that Google hired radio announcers to provide testimonials about the phone, even though they were not allowed to use it. This settlement comes as Google faces scrutiny from both federal and state authorities regarding antitrust and consumer protection issues. Google stated that it takes advertising compliance seriously and is “pleased” to resolve the matter.Google to pay $8 million to settle claims of deceptive ads -Texas AG | ReutersWe have previously reported on the fact Gilead Sciences recently won a patent-infringement case brought by the federal government over HIV drug patents, causing mixed opinions among industry insiders and healthcare advocates about the impact on future collaborations. The jury voided three government-owned patents and ruled that Gilead's Truvada and Descovy for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) did not infringe them. While some believe the verdict won't significantly affect government-industry collaborations, others worry it may discourage pharmaceutical companies from entering license agreements with the government. The case highlights the complex relationship between the government and industry regarding intellectual property rights in research partnerships. Now the issue is that the outcome could potentially lead to a more deferential approach by the government towards pharmaceutical companies, raising concerns about high drug prices and limited access for consumers. The case underscores the ongoing tension between the government's desire to protect its rights and the pharmaceutical industry's need for collaboration, leaving the future of such partnerships uncertain and signaling potential implications for not only pricing but also access to innovative treatments.Big Pharma, US Research Pacts in Flux After Gilead's Trial WinRush-Copley Medical Center Inc., located in Illinois, has been denied summary judgment in a medical malpractice case where a non-employed doctor, Hinna Khan, is accused of negligence. The court ruled that the degree of control exerted by the hospital over Khan was a matter of fact that needed to be determined by a jury. Typically, hospitals have no control over the medical judgment of non-employee physicians, but this case raises the question of whether the hospital can be held vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of a doctor perceived by patients to be employed by the facility.Nathaniel Pryor Sr. and Adriana Madrigal filed the lawsuit against Rush and Khan, alleging that negligent care by the pediatrician caused brain damage, leading to their son's cerebral palsy, seizure disorder, and permanent disability. Rush argued that it couldn't be held liable because Khan was not its employee, as indicated on an admission form signed by the baby's mother. However, in Illinois, hospitals can be held responsible for the actions of doctors who are their actual or apparent agents.Apparent agency is established when a physician's actions would reasonably lead someone to believe they are an employee of the hospital, and the hospital acquiesces to such conduct, causing the plaintiff to rely on it. This is a highly fact-dependent question that the court determined should be resolved by a jury. The plaintiffs asserted that Rush's discharge policy required Khan to fulfill certain obligations before discharging a patient, which she allegedly failed to do.Rush contended that the discharge policy only applied to nurses, but there was evidence suggesting that doctors were also expected to follow it. Judge Franklin U. Valderrama concluded that there was an unresolved question of fact regarding Rush's control over Khan's discharge decisions, denying the hospital's motion for summary judgment. The case will now proceed to trial, shedding light on the complex issue of hospital liability for non-employed physicians and the importance of clarifying the nature of their relationship in such cases.Illinois Hospital Faces Trial Over Doctor's Alleged Negligence Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

If you illegally hinder trade, you have whole new world of problems called the Sherman Antitrust Act. On Business Law 101 episode 150, we talk about price fixing, price discrimination, and dividing territories.   Thanks for joining me for this episode! I'm a Houston- based attorney, run an HR Consulting company called Claremont Management Group, and am a tenured professor at the University of St. Thomas. I've also written several non-fiction political commentary books: Bad Deal for America (2022) explores the Vegas-style corruption running rampant in Washington DC, while The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures (2018) analyzes – and grades – the leadership qualities of the past 100 years of U.S. presidents. You can find my books on Amazon, and me on social media (Twitter @DSchein1, LinkedIn @DavidSchein, and Facebook, Instagram, & YouTube @AuthorDavidSchein). I'd love to hear from you!   As always, the opinions expressed in this podcast are mine and my guests' and not the opinions of my university, my company, or the businesses with which I am connected.

Ep225: This Week at Work we talk about how to develop supervisors and managers that perform well as people leaders. We're joined by special guest Matt Wideman, AAIM's Business Manager of Training and Development, as we discuss the benefits of providing new leaders the skills and confidence to succeed when transitioning to roles with added responsibilities. Lawyer on the Clock: 5:06 - The DOJ has taken a renewed interest in what are called no poach cases, where one company agrees with another company not to hire the other's employees. Specifically looking at wage fixing, which is a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. 9:47 - OSHA has adopted a new rule under the Taxpayers First Act that outlines whistleblower protections in regards to testifying about tax violations. 11:45 - The NLRB is now seeking to regulate discussions of race in the workplace, protecting employees from retaliation for having workplace discussions about racism.   Special Guest Matt Wideman 24:34 - Demand is up for training supervisors. Top skills needed are communication, the ability to coach, and the ability to provide feedback to their teams. 30:00 - Poll results are in: the most important traits supervisors need are being supportive, tenacious, and communicative. Once we have those core basic skills, it's important to layer on things like delegation skills, the ability to manage change, and dealing with conflict.     Guest(s): Matt Wideman, Business Manager of Training and OD, AAIM Employers' Association Powered by AAIM Employers' Association and Ogletree Deakins, a Feature Group USA production 

Episode Eighteen: A Deep Dive Into Antitrust Violations and the Procurement Collusion Strike Force Unwittingly walking into an antitrust violation can be easier than it seems. In our latest podcast episode, listen as Fox Rothschild partners Ryan Becker and Kristen Broz explore the recent spike in enforcement activity by the Justice Department's Procurement Collusion Strike Force. The duo also share PCSF's upcoming priorities, as well as offer tips to government contractors to help avoid actions that could potentially violate the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Would-be monopolists have traditionally faced fines and civil remedies; under the Biden Administration's more muscular enforcement of the Sherman Antitrust Act, they could face jail time as well. Law professor Travis Wheeler walks the former acting head of the DOJ Antitrust Division Richard Powers through some of the most famous monopolization cases in US legal history to help us understand where we could see criminal charges under the new regime. With special guests: Travis C. Wheeler, Nexsen | Pruet and Richard A. Powers, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP Hosted by: Anant Raut

Sahaj Sharda, the author of The College Cartel, is Tayo's very special guest on the podcast today. Sahaj's book explores the monopolistic greed of Ivy League colleges and other elite schools and how these institutions are creating artificial scarcity in their admissions processes. Tayo and Sahaj discuss how this is leading to discrimination, price fixing, and other exploitative practices in higher education. They also discuss potential solutions to move past the systems of oppression that exist in the education system, and share their own personal experiences and perspectives on the topic, highlighting how the culture and expectations surrounding elite education differ across the world.Along the way, Tayo and Sahaj delve into the idea that higher education is not just about learning, but also about networking and signaling, citing examples of how attending prestigious universities such as MIT or Harvard can open doors for students that would not be available to them if they went to other schools. Sahaj then goes on to talk about how the resource and funding differences between schools play a huge role in the education that students receive, and he explains how the internet has made learning more accessible, but the value of prestigious universities, again, has to do with the network and signaling they provide. The episode draws to a close with some ideas about how to remedy this situation and break up the cartel. Join Tayo and Sahaj here today for this deep dive into the inside world of higher education's market and the changes that need to happen within it.The Finer Details of This Episode:The monopolistic greed of Ivy League colleges and other elite schoolsHow these institutions are creating artificial scarcity in their admissions processesSome examples of discrimination, price fixing, and other exploitative practices in higher educationSome potential solutions to these problemsTayo and Sahaj's experiences with these issuesExerting pressure on US News to change its ranking criteriaSuppressing student athlete wages and faculty wagesCollusion in suppressing wages and creating artificial scarcity.The real value of a higher education The impact of the differences in funding and resources between schools The Sherman Antitrust Act and exemptions within itCreating a national system of education to break up the college cartelLinks: Connect with Sahaj Sharda: Sahaj's Website: https://sahajsharda.substack.com/Break the Cartel: https://www.breakthecartel.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/hajshardaConnect with Tayo Rockson and the As Told By Nomads Podcast:Tayo's Website: https://tayorockson.com/Tayo on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tayorockson/Tayo on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/tayorocksonUYD Management: https://www.uydmanagement.com/UYD Collective: https://tayorockson.com/uyd-collective Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week we're taking a closer look at the idea that “capitalism breeds innovation.” Does it? Elise digs into our troubling corporate track record of stifling competition and creating mega-monopolies, including the co-opting of a beloved board game. She tells us how the Sherman Antitrust Act came to be and why it's more necessary than ever today. Other topics include retro-futurism, ghost comedies, and closing the wealth gap. Subscribe/follow/press the button to keep up with new episodes every Wednesday! You can also follow us @worldisburnin on Instagram and Twitter, and check out our website worldisburning.com for extended show notes including sources and photos. World Is Burning is hosted by Olivia Hamilton and Elise Nye. Our theme music is by Kaycie Satterfield, and our logo was made by Sonja Katanic. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/worldisburning/message

Restraints of trade is a common law doctrine relating to the enforceability of contractual restrictions on freedom to conduct business. It is a precursor of modern competition law. In an old leading case of Mitchel v Reynolds (1711) Lord Smith LC said, It is the privilege of a trader in a free country, in all matters not contrary to law, to regulate his own mode of carrying it on according to his own discretion and choice. If the law has regulated or restrained his mode of doing this, the law must be obeyed. But no power short of the general law ought to restrain his free discretion. A contractual undertaking not to trade is void and unenforceable against the promisor as contrary to the public policy of promoting trade, unless the restraint of trade is reasonable to protect the interest of the purchaser of a business. Restraints of trade can also appear in post-termination restrictive covenants in employment contracts. United States. In the US, the first significant discussion occurred in the Sixth Circuit's opinion by Chief Judge (later US President and still later Supreme Court Chief Justice) William Howard Taft in United States v Addyston Pipe & Steel Company Judge Taft explained the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 as a statutory codification of the English common-law doctrine of restraint of trade, as explicated in such cases as Mitchel v Reynolds. The court distinguished between naked restraints of trade and those ancillary to the legitimate main purpose of a lawful contract and reasonably necessary to effectuation of that purpose. An example of the latter would be a non-competition clause associated with the lease or sale of a bakeshop, as in the Mitchel case. Such a contract should be tested by a "rule of reason," meaning that it should be deemed legitimate if "necessary and ancillary." An example of the naked type of restraint would be the price-fixing and bid-allocation agreements involved in the Addyston case. Taft said that "we do not think there is any question of reasonableness open to the courts to such a contract." The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment. During the following century, the Addyston Pipe opinion of Judge Taft has remained foundational in antitrust analysis. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

This week, Abigail takes her chance to ever get traditionally published and sends it to a reeeeeeal nice farm upstate. Join her and bookseller Kat to discuss the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, how publishing doesn't work, $100,000 authors, and dumpster train. PUBLISHERS WEEKLY COVERAGE OF PRH VS DOJ: https://bit.ly/3zZbaw9FRAGILE BEINGS by ABIGAIL KELLY: https://amzn.to/3noTlR9CONSORT'S GLORY by ABIGAIL KELLY: https://amzn.to/3NthxfPABIGAIL'S PATREON: patreon.com/worksbyabigailKOT'S MERCH STORE: https://rdbl.co/2Vg6ZeACITIZENS OF THIRST DISCORD SERVER: https://bit.ly/30NsP8PTWITTER, FACEBOOK, & INSTAGRAM: @kingdomthirstKoT'S BOOKSHOP: bookshop.org/shop/kingdomthirstEMAIL: kingdomofthirst@gmail.comPO Box 460816San Francisco CA, United States94146-0816Kingdom of Thirst is a member of the Frolic Podcast Network! Find all our episodes and tons of new podcasts to enjoy at frolic.media/podcasts.

在喜马拉雅已支持实时字幕关注公众号“高效英语磨耳朵”获取文稿和音频词汇提示1.negotiate 谈判2.contracts 合同3.conditions 条件4.reserve 储备5.duration 期间6.notorious 臭名昭著的7.intact 完整8.militant 激进9.granted 赋予10.previously 以前11.colluded 串通12.servitude 奴役原文Free Agency“Free agency”refers to the ability of athletes to negotiate their own contracts and working conditions in professional sport.Before the 1970s，most professional sports had some sort of reserve system for athletes.In their reserve systems，players were forced to play for a single team-usually for the duration of their careers-under the conditions set by the team owner and the league bosses.Historically，the sport of baseball had the most notorious reserve system，which had been intact and strictly enforced for decades.The purpose of the reserve system was to allow owners of professional teams to control the movement of players and reduce their salaries.By being forced to play for only one team，players had little choice but to accept the contractual terms and conditions set out for the player.The player，in short，did not have the freedom to offer and negotiated his services on the open market，as is done on all other industries.This significantly reduced owners' payroll expenses，and increased profits greatly.In North America，the major professional leagues-in the sports of baseball，football，hockey and basketball-all had some form of reserve system.In the late-1960s and 1970s，however，the reserve system encountered a number of challenges.The most important challenge came from a baseball player，Curt Flood of the St. Louis Cardinals.Flood refused the terms of a trade and offered his services on the open market of the Major League Baseball.When no offers were made，Flood field suit in American courts under the Sherman Antitrust Act，which makes it unlawful for any business or combination of businesses to maintain a monopoly in any commercial industry.While Flood did not win the case，a series of subsequent legal decisions made it apparent，that baseball owners had unreasonable control over their laborers-the players.The baseball players' union became more militant as a result of the Flood case.In 1976，a court decision granted players free agency and the right to negotiate the conditions of their labor services much more freely than they had in the past.The move to free agency changed the character of the relations between professional sports clubs and their owners.Previously，owners worked or colluded together to limit the movement of playersProfessional sports clubs acted like a well-organized club.Free agency meant a more competitive environment for players，and of course player salaries have risen substantially as a result.Today，sports fans often complain that players' salaries are too high.While certainly at times it seems difficult to justify the huge salaries of today，it should be kept in mind that before the current era of free agency and big contracts，players barely made a subsistence wage，and often worked under conditions of servitude.The situation now might be less than perfect；however，it's certainly a vast improvement over the pre-free agency days.翻译自由代理“自由代理”指运动员在职业体育项目中谈判自己的合同和工作条件的能力。20世纪70年代之前，大多数职业体育项目都有某种运动员后备制度。在他们的预备队体系中，球员被迫在球队老板和联盟老板设定的条件下，在职业生涯中只为一支球队效力。从历史上看，棒球运动有着最臭名昭著的预备队制度，几十年来一直保持完整并严格执行。预备队制度的目的是允许职业球队的老板控制球员的移动，并降低他们的工资。由于被迫只为一支球队效力，球员们别无选择，只能接受为球员制定的合同条款和条件。简而言之，运动员没有在公开市场上提供和协商服务的自由，就像在所有其他行业一样。这大大减少了业主的工资支出，并大大增加了利润。在北美，棒球、足球、曲棍球和篮球等主要职业联赛都有某种形式的预备队制度。然而，在20世纪60年代末和70年代，后备系统遇到了一些挑战。最重要的挑战来自棒球运动员，圣路易斯红衣主教队的柯特·弗雷德。弗雷德拒绝了交易条款，并在美国职业棒球大联盟的公开市场上提供服务。在没有报价的情况下，弗雷德根据《谢尔曼反垄断法》向美国法院提起诉讼，该法规定，任何企业或企业组织在任何商业行业保持垄断是非法的。虽然弗雷德没有赢得这场官司，但随后的一系列法律判决表明，棒球队拥有者对他们的劳动者——球员——拥有不合理的控制权。由于弗雷德事件，棒球运动员工会变得更加激进。1976年，一项法院判决授予球员自由代理权，以及比过去更自由地协商其劳工服务条件的权利。向自由球员的转变改变了职业体育俱乐部与其所有者之间关系的性质。以前，老板们一起工作或串通来限制球员的移动职业体育俱乐部就像一个组织良好的俱乐部。自由球员意味着球员们有一个更具竞争力的环境，当然球员的薪水也因此大幅上升。如今，体育迷经常抱怨运动员的工资太高。当然，有时似乎很难证明今天的巨额工资是合理的，但应该记住，在当前的自由代理和大合同时代之前，球员几乎没有维持生计的工资，而且经常在劳役条件下工作。现在的情况可能不太完美；然而，与自由球员制之前的日子相比，这无疑是一个巨大的进步。

Applicability The Fourth Amendment, and the personal rights which it secures, have a long history. The Bill of Rights originally restricted only the federal government, and went through a long initial phase of "judicial dormancy;" in the words of historian Gordon S Wood, "After ratification, most Americans promptly forgot about the first ten amendments to the Constitution." Federal jurisdiction regarding criminal law was narrow until the late 19th century when the Interstate Commerce Act and Sherman Antitrust Act were passed. As federal criminal jurisdiction expanded to include other areas such as narcotics, more questions about the Fourth Amendment came to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court responded to these questions by stating on the one hand that the government powers to search and seizure are limited by the Fourth Amendment so that arbitrary and oppressive interference by enforcement officials with the privacy and personal security of individuals are prevented and by outlining on the other hand the fundamental purpose of the amendment as guaranteeing "the privacy, dignity and security of persons against certain arbitrary and invasive acts by officers of the Government, without regard to whether the government actor is investigating crime or performing another function". To protect personal privacy and dignity against unwarranted intrusion by the State is the overriding function of the Fourth Amendment according to the Court in Schmerber v California (1966), because "he security of one's privacy against arbitrary intrusion by the police" is "at the core of the Fourth Amendment" and "basic to a free society." Pointing to historic precedents like Entick v Carrington (1765) and Boyd v United States (1886), the Supreme Court held in Silverman v United States (1961) that the Fourth Amendments core is the right to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion. With a view to Camara v Municipal Court (1967) the Supreme Court observed in Torres v Madrid (2021) that the focus of the Fourth Amendment is the privacy and security of individuals, not the particular manner of arbitrary invasion by governmental officials. In Mapp v Ohio (1961), the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The effect of the Fourth Amendment is to put the courts of the United States and Federal officials, in the exercise of their power and authority, under limitations and restraints as to the exercise of such power and authority, and to forever secure the people, their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against all unreasonable searches and seizures under the guise of law. This protection reaches all alike, whether accused of crime or not, and the duty of giving to it force and effect is obligatory upon all intrusted under our Federal system with the enforcement of the laws. The tendency of those who execute the criminal laws of the country to obtain conviction by means of unlawful seizures and enforced confessions, the latter often obtained after subjecting accused persons to unwarranted practices destructive of rights secured by the Federal Constitution, should find no sanction in the judgments of the courts, which are charged at all times with the support of the Constitution, and to which people of all conditions have a right to appeal for the maintenance of such fundamental rights. --Justice William R Day in the Opinion of the Court in Weeks v United States (1914).

The battle between the NFL and the USFL finally comes to a head. Donald Trump has bullied his way to the top of the USFL and pressured his league into suing the NFL for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. But the NFL Commissioner Pete Rozelle is not about to back down. If the NFL settles now, they'll be opening the floodgates to a slew of new competitors, and costly trials the league can't afford. The only course of action? Dismantle the USFL so completely that no one even thinks to challenge the NFL again.

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 297, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: Been There... 1: This country is in the east of a subcontinent. Bangladesh. 2: This nation sticks out like a sore thumb. Denmark. 3: It extends about 3,200 miles from east to west. Indonesia. 4: You don't hear so much about the East Bank where this country is. Jordan. 5: Formerly a British protectorate, it's the republic outlined here. Zambia. Round 2. Category: Storytellers 1: "Call him" the narrator of "Moby Dick". Ishmael. 2: Some sources say it was Carnegie Hall; others say it was the '67 Newport Festival where he first sang "Alice's Restaurant". Arlo Guthrie. 3: In addition to her "Fairie Tale Theatre", she now has "Tall Tales and Legends" playing on cable. Shelly Duvall. 4: He wrote his first 2 novels, "A Time to Kill" and "The Firm", while serving in the Mississippi legislature. John Grisham. 5: His "True at First Light", about an African safari, was published in 1999, 38 years after his suicide. Hemingway. Round 3. Category: Beatle Wannabes? 1: This prosecutor struck up the band for Bill Clinton's impeachment with his report. (Kenneth) Starr. 2: Known as a great orator, this president sang the praises for the Sherman Antitrust Act he signed into law. Benjamin Harrison. 3: Bill McCartney's harmony with Jesus led him to quit as football coach of this University's Buffaloes. Colorado. 4: Imagine Thomas Lennon's success with this Comedy Central show he co-created in which he plays Lt. Dangle. Reno 911!. 5: Son of Constantine I, Paul I became a solo act after succeeding George II as king of this country. Greece. Round 4. Category: Projectiles 1: In this sport you carry your projectiles in a quiver. archery. 2: At the end of "The Dating Game", Jim Lange invited couples to throw these "projectiles" to the audience. kisses. 3: Star-shaped projectiles were in the arsenal of these feudal Japanese mercenaries similar to samurai. ninjas. 4: The projectiles fly at 150 mph and can kill in this fronton-based game. jai alai. 5: It's the discharge of several projectiles or a return tennis shot made before the ball hits the ground. a volley. Round 5. Category: Good Doggie 1: The Pembroke variety of this breed is popular with royalty. corgis. 2: Lord Tweedsmuir bred some yellow these to produce the breed we know as golden these. retrievers. 3: This breed was originally raised by the Romans to fight lions. a Rottweiler. 4: The pharaohs bred this ancient dog, also called the gazelle hound. salukis. 5: The name of this breed comes from a Slavic word meaning "swift". a Borzoi. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!

The Congress shall have Power To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. The Supreme Court has seldom restrained the use of the commerce clause for widely varying purposes. The first important decision related to the commerce clause was Gibbons v Ogden, decided by a unanimous Court in 1824. The case involved conflicting federal and state laws: Thomas Gibbons had a federal permit to navigate steamboats in the Hudson River, while the other, Aaron Ogden, had a monopoly to do the same granted by the state of New York. Ogden contended that "commerce" included only buying and selling of goods and not their transportation. Chief Justice John Marshall rejected this notion. Marshall suggested that "commerce" includes navigation of goods, and that it "must have been contemplated" by the Framers. Marshall added that Congress's power over commerce "is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution". The expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause was restrained during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when a laissez-faire attitude dominated the Court. In United States v E C Knight Company (1895), the Supreme Court limited the newly enacted Sherman Antitrust Act, which had sought to break up the monopolies dominating the nation's economy. The Court ruled that Congress could not regulate the manufacture of goods, even if they were later shipped to other states. Chief Justice Melville Fuller wrote, "commerce succeeds to manufacture, and is not a part of it." The U.S. Supreme Court sometimes ruled New Deal programs unconstitutional because they stretched the meaning of the commerce clause. In Schechter Poultry Corp. v United States, (1935) the Court unanimously struck down industrial codes regulating the slaughter of poultry, declaring that Congress could not regulate commerce relating to the poultry, which had "come to a permanent rest within the State." As Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes put it, "so far as the poultry here in question is concerned, the flow of interstate commerce has ceased." Judicial rulings against attempted use of Congress's Commerce Clause powers continued during the 1930s. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

This podcast continues the discussion on the period we call the Gilded Age. We pick this podcast up by introducing JP Morgan and Rockefeller's business enterprises and the problems their monopolies caused.  We then go into the government's legislation in the Sherman Antitrust Act, the creation of the FTC, how it evolved into what it is today, as well as the Departments of Commerce and Labor. Lastly, we get into more modern-day monopolies such as AT&T, and the potential monopolies of Google, Facebook, and Amazon.  There is always more to learn! Go to our website and sign onto our email list. (USHistoryRepeated.com) We will be putting out some great information and historical tidbits and gems that may be left on the cutting room floor during production!

Welcome to Chicks With Sticks! We are exactly what our name explains: two chicks with sticks, lacrosse sticks that is. We are here to talk about women's lacrosse, the sport that brought us together and we believe deserves more recognition. Join our comedic convos about our love for the game, electric players, memorable games, and general lacrosse news. Feel free to send us any of your own stories at chickswithstickspodcast@gmail.com and check us out on Instagram @chickswithstickspodcast too! Enjoy :) (*Sidenote: we claim no rights over the background music in the intro/outro to this podcast. You may recognize the music, it's Trophies by Young Money and Drake. The commentary over the top of it has been borrowed from a variety of lacrosse games that were televised.) Episode 4: A Deal With the Devil College athletes: some of the most praised, popular and under-appreciated young professionals (or should I say amateurs?) of our time. Listen to Delaney and Ashley discuss the details of the Supreme Court Case filed by D1 athletes against the NCAA for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. Listen and be sure to share with us your opinions on the outcomes of the case. Pick Six Podcast Episode: ​​https://open.spotify.com/episode/2HSqYuKg1TMw30mHmKCrLZ?si=Xb6F2qJsQJCrjIoZO0hQFg --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thatsall The NCAA has a long history of forbidding colleges to pay their athletes in order to protect their amateur brand. With ballooning revenues, a collection of players used the Sherman Antitrust Act to sue the NCAA for organizing competing colleges in a joint venture that caps player pay at zero. The court just … Continue reading Should College Athletes Be Paid? An NCAA Antitrust Lawsuit Gets to the Supreme Court →

I issue Facebook an F-grade for their (obviously political) decision to retain former President Trump's account ban, and more generally for violating at least the spirit of the Sherman Antitrust Act. As always, the opinions expressed in this podcast are mine and my guests' and not the opinions of my university, my company, or the businesses with which I am connected. I am an attorney and speaker as well as the founder and CEO of Claremont Management Group, a consulting firm in Houston, Texas. I'm also a tenured professor and the Associate Dean for Graduate Programs at the University of St. Thomas. I have written and published The Decline of America: 100 Years of Leadership Failures, a thought-provoking, non-partisan book that reviews the last 100 years of American Presidents (from Wilson through Obama), offering not just criticism, but common-sense solutions to help fix America before it's too late. I also host the podcast Business Law 101, where I examine the intersection between business and politics. Remember to subscribe to and rate Saving America and Business Law 101 in your favorite podcast app!

John D. Rockefeller is considered the richest man to ever live. His net worth, when adjusted for inflation, would be more than $340 Billion in today's currency, beating the richest person alive today, Jeff Bezos, by more than $150 Billion (Source: celebritynetworth.com). In today's episode, we'll learn how Rockefeller became so successful through his entrepreneurial journey. We'll discuss what tectonic shifts (including the lightbulb, automobile, Civil War, railroad, and more) he leveraged to boost his success. We'll also detail the other secrets like perseverance and stress management that he used to accomplish so much. Rockefeller's Entrepreneurial Journey His Start in Entrepreneurship John D. Rockefeller was born on July 8, 1839. By the age of 16, Rockefeller had his first real office job as an assistant bookkeeper. After success in that job, he partnered with Maurice B. Clark to start their own business in produce. The company, Clark & Rockefeller, earned $4,400 in the first year and $17,000 in the second, which is about $530,000 in today's currency (Sources: biography.com and the successbug.com). Standard Oil Co. In 1863, Rockefeller went into the oil business, opening up a refinery near Cleveland, Ohio. Many others sought success in the oil business but ultimately failed. Rockefeller's success in this venture may have been because, unlike other refineries that would keep the 60% of oil product that became kerosene and dump the other 40% in rivers and massive sludge piles, Rockefeller sold the 40% others were wasting as lubricating oil, petroleum jelly, paraffin wax, tar, and other by-products. In other words, he monetized an asset he already had. Rockefeller grew Standard Oil Co., and by 1872, he had purchased 22 of the 26 competitors in Cleveland. The company also acquired their entire supply chain, adding their own pipelines, tank cars, and home delivery network (Sources: biography.com and the successbug.com). Corporation Challenges Standard Oil controlled more than 90% of the oil industry, causing legislators to take notice. Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was created. Rockefeller had to dissolve Standard Oil and allow each property to be run by others, though the corporation's board maintained control over the individual properties (Sources: biography.com and the successbug.com). In 1909, “New Jersey . . . changed its incorporation laws to effectively allow a re-creation of the trust in the form of a single holding company. Rockefeller retained his nominal title as president until 1911 and he kept his stock.” However, in 1911, “the Supreme Court . . . found Standard Oil Company . . .  in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.” At this time, Standard “still had a 70% market share of the refined oil market but only 14% of the U.S. crude oil supply. The court ruled that the trust originated in illegal monopoly practices and ordered it to be broken up into 34 new companies.”  These companies included Continental Oil, which is now part of ConocoPhillips; Standard of Indiana, which is now part of BP; Standard of California, which became Chevron; Standard of New Jersey, which later became, Exxon, and is now part of ExxonMobil; Standard of New York, which became Mobil, now part of ExxonMobil; and Standard of Ohio, which became Sohio, now part of BP. “Rockefeller, who had rarely sold shares, held over 25% of Standard's stock at the time of the breakup. He and all of the other stockholders received proportionate shares in each of the 34 companies.” Rockefeller had reduced control over the oil industry. However, over the next 10 years, the breakup would prove to be immensely profitable. “The companies' combined net worth rose fivefold and Rockefeller's personal wealth jumped to $900 million.” (Source: wikipedia.org) Philanthropy Rockefeller believed in the Methodist preacher John Wesley's dictum "gain all you can, save all you can, and give all you can." (Source: wikipedia.org) It isn't possible for me to include all of Rockefeller's philanthropic endeavors because there are just too many, but here are a few. “In 1884, Rockefeller provided major funding for Atlanta Baptist Female Seminary in Atlanta for African-American women, which became Spelman College. His wife Laura Spelman Rockefeller, was dedicated to civil rights and equality for women.” When speaking about Laura, Rockefeller said, "Her judgment was always better than mine. Without her keen advice, I would be a poor man."  “The Spelman Family . . . along with John Rockefeller, were ardent abolitionists before the Civil War and were dedicated to supporting the Underground Railroad. John Rockefeller was impressed by the vision of the school and removed the debt from the school. The oldest existing building on Spelman's campus, Rockefeller Hall, is named after him.” (Source: wikipedia.org) After his retirement, Rockefeller also helped pay for the University of Chicago, donating more than $80 Million to it. He helped found the Rockefeller Foundation and the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, which was later named Rockefeller University (Sources: biography.com and the successbug.com).  Rockefeller “founded the Rockefeller Sanitary Commission in 1909, an organization that eventually eradicated the hookworm disease.” (Source: wikipedia.org) By the end of his life, he had donated more than $530 million to various causes (Sources: biography.com and the successbug.com). This is one of the best parts of capitalism and entrepreneurship. They give entrepreneurs the resources and ability to make far greater social contributions. Tectonic Shifts Rockefeller Leveraged The Light Bulb and the Automobile Before the introduction of electricity, oil was the main source of lighting. Whale oil was expensive, but kerosene helped that become available to the working and middle classes, and Rockefeller took advantage of that. However, the invention of the lightbulb changed all of that. It “gradually began to erode the dominance of kerosene for illumination.”  Standard Oil had to adapt to this tectonic shift by “developing a European presence, expanding into natural gas production in the U.S., and producing gasoline for automobiles, which until then had been considered a waste product.” (Source: wikipedia.org) Rockefeller was able to find success with the tectonic shift of the automobile. Food Supplies During the Civil War As mentioned earlier, Rockefeller and his partner went into the produce business early in his career. Their business did well in its first two years, but when the Union Army called for large amounts of food and supplies in the Civil War, their profits soared. During the Civil War, “Rockefeller tended his business and hired substitute soldiers. He gave money to the Union cause.” He said, “I wanted to go in the army and do my part. But it was simply out of the question. There was no one to take my place. We were in a new business, and if I had not stayed it must have stopped—and with so many dependent on it.” “When the Civil War was nearing a close and with the prospect of those war-time profits ending, Clark & Rockefeller looked toward the refining of crude oil.” (Source: wikipedia.org) The Railroad Rockefeller “was well-positioned to take advantage of postwar prosperity and the great expansion westward fostered by the growth of railroads and an oil-fueled economy. He borrowed heavily, reinvested profits, adapted rapidly to changing markets, and fielded observers to track the quickly expanding industry.” Standard Oil “became one of the largest shippers of oil and kerosene in the country. The railroads competed fiercely for traffic and, in an attempt to create a cartel to control freight rates, formed the South Improvement Company offering special deals to bulk customers like Standard Oil, outside the main oil centers. The cartel offered preferential treatment as a high-volume shipper, which included not just steep discounts/rebates of up to 50% for their product but rebates for the shipment of competing products.” (Source: wikipedia.org) Our Business Should be About Our Passions—Not Money “If your only goal is to become rich, you will never achieve it.” - John D. Rockefeller Rockefeller truly loved what he did. He knew business would be better if there was something bigger behind it than money (Source: 2x.co). “I know of nothing more despicable and pathetic than a man who devotes all the hours of the waking day to the making of money for money's sake.” - John D. Rockefeller Credibility Though Rockefeller wasn't perfect, he cared a lot about his credibility. He often struggled to get the amount of money he needed to achieve his goals, but he won the trust of banks and investors, enabling him to take his business farther than he would have been able to otherwise. It is said that Rockefeller remembered 3,000 of his employees' names (Source: 2x.co). An impressive accomplishment that showed his employees that he cared about them, pushing his credibility through the roof because of the respect they likely had for him. By showing people we care about them by doing something as simple as remembering their names, we can boost our credibility. In addition, it will help us build stronger relationships with those we work with. Building “Skyscrapers” on Land We Own As Standard Oil grew and purchased its competitors, it got into the business of buying pipelines and terminals and setting up a system of transport for its own products. Standard came to control or own almost every aspect of the business, and its grip on the industry tightened. It even bought thousands of acres of forest for lumber, drilling, and blocking competitors from running their own pipelines (Source: biography.com). While the monopoly was later deemed unlawful by Congress, we can still learn the value of controlling the aspects of our businesses from this example. If we build our business on a platform that we don't own, we have limited control over that platform, and the platform can change the rules and have a huge impact on our business.  Other Secrets to Success Perseverance “I do not think that there is any other quality so essential to success of any kind as the quality of perseverance. It overcomes almost everything, even nature.” - John D. Rockefeller As entrepreneurs, our businesses might not take off right away despite our hard work. Rockefeller had to start out his career as an assistant bookkeeper before he could start the business he wanted to. He persevered in that job until he and his partner could start their own business. Sometimes our goals take longer than we expect, or we have to do things we don't want to in order to reach them. It is important to keep our goals in mind and let them drive us when things aren't how we want them to be. If we work hard and persevere, things often get better. Keeping a Cool Head When circumstances went wrong and others began panicking, Rockefeller was known for keeping his cool. Even though he started his career during a great market depression, he remained calm, being careful and watching others learn from their mistakes (Source: forgefinancialfreedom.com and 2x.co). “I always tried to turn every disaster into an opportunity.” - John D. Rockefeller We, too, can keep our heads during stressful situations, and it will help us make better decisions. It will also encourage our employees and associates to remain calm as well.  Stress Management There were several periods of Rockefeller's life where he experienced great stress. In the 1870s and 80s, Rockefeller was carrying out his plan of consolidation and integration and was being attacked by the press while doing so. He complained that he couldn't stay asleep most nights. He later said, “All the fortune that I have made has not served to compensate me for the anxiety of that period.” When he was in “his 50s Rockefeller suffered from moderate depression and digestive troubles; during a stressful period in the 1890s he developed alopecia, the loss of some or all body hair.” Rockefeller started wearing toupées by 1901. Unfortunately, his hair never grew back. However other health complaints subsided when he lightened his workload. To help manage his stress, here are a couple of tactics Rockefeller used. The Importance of a Consistent Schedule Rockefeller had to keep a meticulous schedule, planning every minute, otherwise, his day would fall into chaos. He never diverged from it. However, he didn't let it control him either. He was the master of his schedule, and the schedule was not the master of him.  By keeping such a strict schedule, he was able to be in the present moment. He could focus more easily because he devoted time to each of the important things in his life, and therefore, he wouldn't get distracted by other things (Sources: forgefinancialfreedom.com and 2x.co). “Singleness of purpose is one of the chief essentials for success in life, no matter what may be one's aim.” - John D. Rockefeller The Importance of Rest One aspect of Rockefeller's schedule was his time dedicated to rest. He loved to nap after lunch and dinner. When he was in his 30s, he installed a telegraph wire between his work and home so he could spend 3-4 afternoons during the week at home, gardening and enjoying the outdoors (Source: cnbc.com). Entrepreneurs often forget how important balance is in life. We often get excited about the ventures we are working on and forget that it is crucial to take time to relax or be with loved ones so we don't exhaust ourselves and burn out.  “It is remarkable how much we all could do if we avoid hustling, and go along at an even pace and keep from attempting too much.” - John D. Rockefeller Faith During his childhood, Rockefeller attended a local Baptist church with his mother and siblings. Rockefeller's mother was very religious. She was a major influence for him in religious matters. While they were at church, she would encourage him “to contribute his few pennies to the congregation. He came to associate the church with charity.” Religion became a guiding force throughout his life, and he believed it was the source of his success (Source: wikipedia.org). As a devout Northern Baptist, Rockefeller read the Bible daily, attended prayer meetings twice a week, and even led his own Bible study with his wife. He supported Baptist missionary activity, funded universities, and heavily engaged in religious activities at his church. While traveling the South, he donated large sums of money to churches belonging to the Southern Baptist Convention, various Black churches, and other Christian denominations. One time, Rockefeller paid for a slave's freedom, and another time he donated to a Roman Catholic orphanage. As he grew rich, his donations to churches became more generous (Source: wikipedia.org). Key Takeaways Here are some of my key takeaways from this episode: We can boost our credibility by remembering our associate's names. Having good credibility can lead to help from people like bankers and investors. This help can allow us to take our business further. We should build skyscrapers on land we own. Perseverance is one of the most important attributes an entrepreneur can have.  Keeping a consistent schedule can help us focus more easily and be more efficient in our work. In addition, taking time in our schedule to relax can help us keep a balanced life. We can make better decisions and help our associates remain calm if we keep a cool head in stressful situations. Philanthropy is one of the best parts of capitalism and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs have the resources and ability to make far greater social contributions. Rockefeller leveraged many of the tectonic shifts like the light bulb and the railroad. We can leverage the tectonic shifts in our time to gain success. Want to be a Better Digital Monetizer? Did you like today's episode? Then please follow these channels to receive free digital monetization content: Get a free Monetization Assessment of your business Subscribe to the free Monetization eMagazine. Subscribe to the Monetization Nation YouTube channel. Subscribe to the Monetization Nation podcast on Apple Podcast, Google Podcasts, Spotify, or Stitcher.  Follow Monetization Nation on Instagram and Twitter. Share Your Story  What did you learn from John D. Rockefeller that you can apply to your business? Please join our private Monetization Nation Facebook group and share your insights with other digital monetizers. Read at: https://monetizationnation.com/blog/70-john-d-rockefellers-monetization-secrets-how-he-became-the-richest-man-in-modern-history/ 

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thatsall The NCAA has a long history of forbidding colleges to pay their athletes in order to protect their amateur brand. With ballooning revenues, a collection of players are using the Sherman Antitrust Act to sue the NCAA for organizing competing colleges in a joint venture that caps player pay at zero. Here is … Continue reading Should College Athletes Be Paid? An NCAA Antitrust Lawsuit Gets to the Supreme Court →

We are entering into the next epoch of U.S. foreign policy. In this week's episode, host Harvey Rishikoff and guest Dr. John Hamre discuss a handful of critical issues - from industrial competition with China, to the growing polarization of America - and the role national security law will play in this next policy chapter. Dr. John Hamre is president and CEO of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). He notably served as US deputy secretary of defense from 1997 to 1999 and undersecretary of defense from 1993 to 1997. Before his tenure at the Department of Defense, Hamre was professional staff member to the Senate Armed Services Committee and deputy assistant director at the Congressional Budget Office. This episode references: - Sherman Antitrust Act: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/antitrust-laws-amendments-1890-1956-1136/sherman-antitrust-act-1513 - The Safe Tech Act: https://www.warner.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/4/f/4fa9c9ba-2b34-4854-8c19-59a0a9676a31/66DECFBC0D6E6958C2520C3A6A69EAF6.safe-tech-act---final.pdf - Section 230, Communication Decency Act: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 - "Intelligence Analysts Use U.S. Smartphone Location Data Without Warrants, Memo Says." New York Times, Jan. 22, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/22/us/politics/dia-surveillance-data.html?smid=em-share - "Biden Voting Counties Equal 70% of America's Economy. What Does This Mean for the Nation's Political-Economic Divide?" The Brookings Institution, Nov. 10, 2020: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2020/11/09/biden-voting-counties-equal-70-of-americas-economy-what-does-this-mean-for-the-nations-political-economic-divide/

High-level sports are integrated into US institutions of higher education to an extent that is unparalleled in peer countries. Intercollegiate men's basketball and football, in particular, generate significant revenue from tickets sales and broadcasting rights. At the same time, student-athlete compensation is severely limited. Last year, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that some of these limitations violate the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Supreme Court will review that decision later this term in NCAA v. Alston and American Athletic Conference v. Alston. Watch the event https://www.aei.org/events/how-should-student-athletes-be-compensated/ (here).

In the late 19th century hundreds of small, short-line railroads were being bought up and consolidated into larger companies. Our nation's burgeoning economy was (and still is, in many ways) dependent on those railroad lines which, increasingly, were under the control of a shrinking number of people. Those people began using their monopoly over the transportation of goods to price gouge and manipulate markets. "If we will not endure a king as a political power we should not endure a king over the production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life," Republican Senator John Sherman said at the time. Sherman would ultimately give his name to the Sherman Antitrust Act, which continues to the basis of American antitrust law to this day. The point is that corporate hegemonies should be allowed to suppress free trade. Some argue that's exactly what's happening in the enormous and growing market of app development. That market is dominated by two companies. Apple, the manufacturer of iPhones, and Google, which operates the Android operating system used on phones from pretty much every single non-Apple manufacturer. Companies that sell digital services through these apps - think a subscription to a fitness app, or an in-app purchase in a game like Candy Crush - have to use Apple and Google's payment services and they have to pay a 30 percent fee for the privilege. "This is exactly the same thing" as the railroad monopolies of the 19th century says Lacee Anderson, spokesperson for the Coalition for App Fairness, said on this episode of Plain Talk. It is in this context that North Dakota's lawmakers take up Senate Bill 2333, which was introduced by Republican Senator Kyle Davison of Fargo. Mark Buse, who is a vice president for dating service Match.com, says his company supports the legislation. "The issue is that all app developers should be treated the same." Anderson suggested that Apple and Google have used their control of the app markets to drive out competitors for their own services. She also noted the recent controversies over the tech industry censoring political content as an argument in favor of breaking up these company's controls over apps. No other state has this sort of law in place, though others are considering it. Why should North Dakota lead the charge? It could encourage app developers to locate here in order to avoid Apple and Google's fees. Could Apple and Google cut North Dakotans off from their stores if this legislation passes? After all, our state is but a fraction of the markets those tech giants serve. Anderson says that would be an extreme and unlikely outcome.

Podcast: On the Media (LS 74 · TOP 0.05% what is this?)Episode: Who Owns the Future?Pub date: 2020-12-18Facebook has already been accused of spreading lies and polarizing society. Now, the federal government says it illegally crushed competition. On this week's On the Media, how to roll back a global power that has transformed our economy and warped our democracy.  1. Dina Srinivasan [@DinaSrinivasan], author of the 2019 paper, “The Antitrust Case Against Facebook,” on digital-age interpretations of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Listen. 2. Carole Cadwalladr [@carolecadwalla], journalist for The Guardian and The Observer, on the harms of Facebook unaddressed by both antitrust law and the company's own attempts at self-regulation. Listen.  3. Shoshana Zuboff [@shoshanazuboff], professor emeritus at Harvard Business School and author of The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, on the data extraction and human futures markets that comprise much of our economy. Listen.    Music: Joeira by Kurup Capernaum by Khaled Mouzanar Okami by Nicola Cruz Peer Gynt Suite No. 1 by Edvard GriegThe podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from WNYC Studios, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.

Facebook has already been accused of spreading lies and polarizing society. Now, the federal government says it illegally crushed competition. On this week's On the Media, how to roll back a global power that has transformed our economy and warped our democracy.  1. Dina Srinivasan [@DinaSrinivasan], author of the 2019 paper, “The Antitrust Case Against Facebook,” on digital-age interpretations of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Listen. 2. Carole Cadwalladr [@carolecadwalla], journalist for The Guardian and The Observer, on the harms of Facebook unaddressed by both antitrust law and the company's own attempts at self-regulation. Listen.  3. Shoshana Zuboff [@shoshanazuboff], professor emeritus at Harvard Business School and author of The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, on the data extraction and human futures markets that comprise much of our economy. Listen.    Music: Joeira by Kurup Capernaum by Khaled Mouzanar Okami by Nicola Cruz Peer Gynt Suite No. 1 by Edvard Grieg On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

Facebook has already been accused of spreading lies and polarizing society. Now, the federal government says it illegally crushed competition. On this week’s On the Media, how to roll back a global power that has transformed our economy and warped our democracy.  1. Dina Srinivasan [@DinaSrinivasan], author of the 2019 paper, “The Antitrust Case Against Facebook,” on digital-age interpretations of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Listen. 2. Carole Cadwalladr [@carolecadwalla], journalist for The Guardian and The Observer, on the harms of Facebook unaddressed by both antitrust law and the company's own attempts at self-regulation. Listen.  3. Shoshana Zuboff [@shoshanazuboff], professor emeritus at Harvard Business School and author of The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, on the data extraction and human futures markets that comprise much of our economy. Listen.    Music: Joeira by Kurup Capernaum by Khaled Mouzanar Okami by Nicola Cruz Peer Gynt Suite No. 1 by Edvard Grieg

Copyright 2020 - Barry Cinnamon, The Energy Show Why is Electricity So Expensive? We can complain all we want about the absurdly high price of electricity, but this situation is likely to persist for two reasons. First, electric companies are government-sanctioned monopoly utilities. There is usually only one electricity supplier, just as there is one water and natural gas supplier. Telephone services — and phones themselves — used to be a monopoly; it took years of legal battles leveraging the Sherman Antitrust Act to break the telephone monopoly. Now there is a competitive market for phone services and handsets, just as there is the potential for a free and competitive market for electricity. Second, the cost of electricity is primarily affected by the local cost of living; factors such as electric company wages, real estate costs, taxes, etc. So locations with a high cost of living — such as Hawaii, California and New York — have high electricity prices. And these high electric prices are likely to persist without some magical solution. Speaking of magical solutions, it's not practical to drill a well in your back yard for your own natural gas or water, but I can imagine a future in which you could generate your own electricity. How are the existing monopoly electricity providers reacting to this reality in which customers can produce their own less expensive electricity? Please listen up to this week's Energy Show as we delve into the reasons why electricity is so expensive — and how things are changing as solar, storage and better public policies are rolled out.

스탠다드아웃 93번째 로그에서는 MS 실적 발표와 반독점 청문회, 버블 500, 표준 꺼져?, 요즘 사용하는 앱에 대해서 이야기를 나눴습니다. 참가자: @nacyo_t, @raccoony, @ecleya 정기 후원 - stdout.fm are creating 프로그래머들의 팟캐스트 | Patreon 녹음일 7월 30일, 공개일 8월 23일 쇼노트 stdout.fm are creating 클라우드, 소프트웨어 개발, 전자 제품에 대해 이야기하는 프로그래머들의 팟캐스트 | Patreon 스탠다드아웃 | 오디오 천국 팟빵 신과함깨 코로나19 이후 폭발! 20조 중고거래시장, 당근마켓의 심상치 않는 독주 - 빅사이즈#7 Git 2.28 릴리즈 Highlights from Git 2.28 - The GitHub Blog svn - What is trunk, branch and tag in Subversion? - Stack Overflow MS 실적 발표와 반독점 청문회 코로나 사태에도 마이크로소프트 2분기 매출 13% 증가 - Chosunbiz 애플·아마존·페이스북 美 빅테크, 2분기 깜짝실적… 아이폰 신작 출시 10월로 연기 - Chosunbiz 아마존·애플·구글·페이스북 CEO, 反독점 청문회 증언 ‘주목’ Microsoft Corp. v. United States - Wikipedia Bill Gates - Deposition Part 1 of 12 - YouTube Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 - Wikipedia Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States - Wikipedia Slack has filed an antitrust complaint over Microsoft Teams in the EU | TechCrunch Breakup of the Bell System - Wikipedia 버블500 Breakup of the Bell System - Wikipedia Price–sales ratio - Wikipedia Nikola Corp Nikola Tesla - Wikipedia 이정훈의 마켓워치 매출 제로 니콜라 기적 만든 스팩(SPAC) IT 붐과 신입 교육 Coding bootcamp - Wikipedia welcome home : vim online GNU Emacs - GNU Project 여러분의 CS 교육에서 누락된 학기 · the missing semester of your cs education Design Patterns - Wikipedia 스탠다드아웃 제목 - 표준 꺼져? 스테인리스강 - 위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전 Standard streams - Wikipedia Stack Overflow - Where Developers Learn, Share, & Build Careers 유한책임회사 설립·운영 > 유한책임회사의 운영 > 업무집행 및 대표권 > 업무집행자 (본문) | 찾기쉬운 생활법령정보 요즘 사용하는 앱 이야기 Manage Your Team’s Work, Projects, & Tasks Online · Asana To Do List App | monday.com Jira Pricing - Monthly and Annual Subscription Cost per User wkpark/moniwiki: MoniWiki Graphviz - Graph Visualization Software Private Markdown Notes for iPhone, iPad and Mac | Bear App Alpha Page | Bear’s Editor Future Evolutions | Bear App Deckset for Mac: Presentations from Markdown in No Time (‎Insight Timer - Meditation App on the App Store

Welcome to Finance and Fury, the Furious Friday edition. Last Furious Friday episode – started on a thought experiment – looking at the reversal of the trends in Monetary policy - who knows if these would work and make for a better economy – these were: Separate commercial and investment banking Remove reliance on a debt fuelled economy – reforming central banks to remove inflation targeting as a monetary policy All of these are at the monetary Level – solution isn’t the monetary policy solely – whilst I think that most monetary solutions are a major part of the problem - This week – we will be going through the fiscal side – or governmental or regulatory side – Focus will be on Supply Side Policies help encourage investment and spending at the business level because interest rate cuts are ineffective in boosting spending and investment alone – especially if firms are too reluctant to invest or consumers are stuck paying back higher levels of mortgages – instead they have been taking on more debt which hasn’t been fuelling economic growth as theorised – as debt hasn’t been used productively – due to low opportunity cost for interest rates Issues with the economy are structural areas – on the fiscal side in this episode – looking at: Reverse the trends in regulations and increase supply side thinking Enforce anti-competitive behaviours – i.e. monopolistic practices To start with - Reverse the trends in regulations and increase supply side thinking Supply side thinking and deregulation go hand in hand - provides another way of thinking about a solution to depressions or underperforming economy – rather than increasing the money supply even further in an aim to boost spending – which is demand side - Supply Side – all about boost domestic demand by cutting taxes and reducing regulations – Aim is increasing the supply (companies) and making the job market more competitive – allowing greater number of companies demanding workers – over time should help to increase wages and spending = economic growth – not trickledown economics – which doesn’t exist - covered this in an episode in the past - The Myth of trickle-down economics – originally a term used by journalists and Democrats to discredit these policies – but repeat something false enough and it becomes the truth   Summary of why this theory may work better than the demand side economic theories that have determined governmental policies – problems with demand Keynes -stimulus to boost aggregate demand is only really effective in relatively closed economies (why they tried tariffs back in 1930 – made the economic slump worse though) In the modern economy – with free capital flows, freedom spending and globalization = made most of the stimulus has been in fact relatively ineffective Money can flow off shore – or individuals may not spend domestically when given stimulus checks Created a situation where the multiplier effect has been small - indeed negligible - and the stimulus economic effects have been rather poor Especially when debt funded – so these policies can hardly be justified - I don't think the answer lies in yet more Keynesism, anymore than it necessarily lies in printing yet more money But yet Governments are getting more debts to stimulate the economy - old Economists still love this idea – But how is this money ever repaid? Not their problem – dead before bill is due Meant to boost business demand because people on average have more money – all it has done is fuel house prices – as lending is going towards this Screwed the younger generation – and is having diminishing marginal returns to economic output as debt levels grow What is a potential solution? To look at reversing the trend – looking at the supply side and removing the thought of reliance of governments for economic growth Doesn’t aim for artificial boost of demand – but create real GDP output growth that is sustainable (not just inflationary from increase in prices through expanding money supply)   Solutions to problem We need to look the structural causes of the underperformance of western economies right now And we have to bear in mind that the one reason the economic growth is sluggish is not just that there is a lack of aggregate demand, there are three other major problems. One is the problem of uncertainty and lack of confidence in the business community, which is stopping cash rich firms from investing within western nations – also with low interest rates – they get lots of debt and do share buy backs at the large corporate sector The other is the serious competition from the Asian end of the world and that competition makes it very hard to create jobs and increase wage growth – especially as regulations in each country is no equal – incentivised companies to more jobs offshore Massive companies turning free market competition into more monopolistic competition – this undermines the whole system of supply side Solutions to these problems are structural rather than what most in the economics departments see as focusing on fiscal monetary policy (stimulus) – which requires more structural implementation (government departments or taxes) to hand money out Need to incentivise companies to come back to Australia and western nations – and incentivise supply rather than disincentivise through uncompetitive business environments   Rather than giving people money – aim is to Increase how much money people have – two sides to this – decreasing taxes and increasing wage growth and employment opportunity At the individual level - reduce taxes – or flat tax rates – Taxes are Government revenues $474bn p.a. estimated Income Taxes – how much disposable incomes are reduced by – Currently $218bn Pay average of 38% tax, then say you pay now pay 20%, earning $200k = $36k less tax Argument – they will save it all – true that they may save most, but spending still increases Is it better for governments to increase taxes to turn around and pay this out to people? Or is it better to just collect less tax? Increase PP - Consumption and transfers – also eat away at peoples disposable incomes Stamp Duty – property taxes $52bn GST (VAT other countries) - $132bn Excise/custom duties – Tobacco $12.5b, alcohol $5.7b, fuel $19.5b – Adds increased COL almost $38bn, $1800 per Adult Where do wages come from in the private sector? Companies revenues - Increase wages – just pay them more? Not if the money isn’t there to pay – either lower wages, or less staff Company tax rate – Currently $90bn Payroll tax – One hidden tax paid by companies who employ people once they meet a criteria Changes each state – 4-6% on average on taxable wages – if a company pays you more, they get taxed more Incentive for companies to not increase staff wages, and also if they cant then their costs increase Stats: $23.8bn was collected under this last year – but growth in tax slowing (6%-2%) Companies that might move through threshold are holding off (reduces growth rate of larger companies) – cant just start a second on either – related entities Demand for labour – need more companies in operation – competing for people to hire Cant work under high tax environment though – stifles businesses employing more people Specialised labour – if a low number of people who can do something = low supply Additional element - Increase diversity of supply - Increase PPP – Goods that cost less over time – Think about costs (and size) of TVs 15 years ago, to today What you do see an increase in costs with are things that we can make cheaper – Technology yes, houses no Here is where it all comes undone – these goods can be produced overseas – as these jobs can be outsourced OS – Where Deregulations to the business world is required - for the economy but not the financial system – one area that needs more regulation and separation More regulations – or the trend of ever increasing regulations doesn’t give much confidence to companies – or people who wish to start a company - Confidence and increased investment come hand in hand Strong political direction to be business friendly helps to attract companies – Israel is an example Politicians don’t have clear direction on anything – can barely explain the policies and outcomes No long-term plan beyond the next election cycle – issue with the political trend – they need to seem busy to justify their jobs – which means passing legislation – 90% approval rate = 180 new laws or changes to legislation every year – not to de-legislate – but more and more – when two of the leading industries growth in employment come from government workers or compliance workers – you have a problem in the economy – not productive in producing new goods or services Promising to have stability in legislation - Leavings things alone helps to build confidence– uncertainty is the worst thing for any market – but if politicians aren’t legislating – then it is hard to justify a $200k+ salary each year which you fund Boost Aggregate Demand - Create jobs - Improve business and consumer confidence. Irony is that the black market economy can still help to boost an economy – back in the 80s in Florida with cocaine – banks had negative interest rates – Everyone was spending more as the illegal cash was spent on their businesses – or investing more – personal investments form part of ‘savings’ in GDP – but allows for companies to have more capital to hire more people, pay them more, increase their long term productivity – Increase productivity – less regulation allows for competition internationally - Has a few components, but measures the ‘bang for your buck’ for how much gets done – Technology, labour, capital Labour - Jobs – either lose them through holding on (and subsidising) – or building new technologies that help to facilitate the work that will inevitably be lost – we are in a global economy – like it or not, have to be competitive with other nations Forcing regulation for labour laws hurts - collective bargaining is great, no problem – but not at the national level where it can be forced onto the economy about no feedback on to what is the affordable rate for a role Why a lot of places are closed on Sundays or operate limited hours on weekends – double time and a half Those who work in the company – speak out to the bosses – that is who can help your grievances – When whole industries get forced into the same regulations – it monopolises the employment into a few bigger places that can afford it – for a little while – eventually more policy is passed – help to subsidise them through tax payer funds (rather than just cutting their costs of regulations) – they go out of business In business/free market – if you require subsidies to survive – not a business providing increasing value (growth) All of the above fails if you have larger corporate powers – Large companies are almost socialist in nature – merging of state with companies – where companies have protection and barriers to entry This is where I have changed my thinking over the years – I used to be very much free market – to the libertarian side – but realised that under a fully de-regulated world leads to companies ruling us instead of governments – similar to what has happened in the financial systems or central banking sectors of the economy over the past 100 years The US has a good bit of legislation called the Sherman Antitrust Act – 1890 - broadly prohibits (1) anticompetitive agreements and (2) unilateral conduct that monopolizes or attempts to monopolize the relevant market Major cases back in the early days – Standard Oil was one of the biggest ones in 1911 – same year America tobacco and GE – Next major one was in 1999 with Microsoft - and that Microsoft had taken actions to crush threats to that monopoly, including Apple – acting like thugs forcing companies to either use versions of MSO and IE or have non-working computer and software’s for distribution – were found guilty – without this – Apple was likely going to go out of business – as they were in constant lawsuits with MS and had to use their MS But since then – the legislation hasn’t been well enforced- or doesn’t go far enough Large companies also reduce the competition for employment – you might have the same number of jobs in the market – but if they are all with Amazon – no competitions and they can pay what they want   The goldilocks zone of regulations – not too hot but not too cold – Too hot – or too much – you get a situation where you do get monopolies anyway – companies are forced to merge together – But too much regulation is bad = Corporatocracy -term used to refer to an economic and political system controlled by corporations or corporate interests - It is a form of Plutocracy – and this has been increasing over the years – helping monopolise companies- and become a self-feeding echo chamber between large corporate interests/lobbyists and politicians – who solidify legislation that while hurt all businesses to a limited extent – those at the top are hurt less or have the budget to hire the lawyers to get into the loopholes – companies want to survive – so they merge together as the environment gets harsher – like in nature the largest animals tend to survive longer due to being at the top of the food chain – eats up everything else But then the environment gets harsher – the lions start cannibalising themselves – until one is left – then nothing left to eat but here some humans then have to feed it – which is the government Example – when tech giants are okay for a tax on AI or robotic workers – why? Would cost them more – but not as much as a start up or smaller business that cannot compete – so kill off the competition Too cold – or no regulation – similar situation happens but for different reasons – no protections and you get pricing rackets or forced buyouts – corporate form of Mexican cartel merger Solution – easing regulations to make it an even playing field – but enforcing anti-competitive behaviours -   Why I think these will work - You know what is better to spend your money on – companies need to be able to be flexible and be competitive Individuals are the best judge for what activity will improve their lives – on average. Some people make poor choices – but learning form them lets people grow – it is part of life – similar to the corporate world – but when large company failures are rewarded with bailouts and government backing – creating zombie companies – not free market – just lets small companies fail and large companies artificially thrive Why I don’t think these will work – too much money involved with large companies and donors to political parties – also de-regulation puts a lot of Government out of work – cant have that Also – puts the economy outside of the governments hands Thank you for listening to today's episode. If you want to get in contact you can do so here: http://financeandfury.com.au/contact/

O Sherman Antitrust Act de 1890 é a legislação federal base para os processos antimonopólio e antitrust nos EUA. O problema dela é que ela não foi criada para combater monopólios, e sim para defender grandes empresas, servir de cortina de fumaça para tarifas mais altas na população, e para uma vingança política. Só 10 anos depois ela foi usada contra grandes empresas, e ainda assim muitas vezes por vingança política e perseguição de opositores. Ainda assim, essa lei e sua história fictícia inspiram legislações antitrust por todo o mundo. É preciso entender por que isso não deveria ser levado a sério. Sugestões de Leitura: O grande artigo de Patrick Newman: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3140481 The Progressive Era - Murray Rothbard, em especial a parte sobre Theodore Roosevelt e o Sherman Act The Triumph of Conservatism - Gabriel Kolko, em especial a parte sobre monopólios e competição, como faliam quando não tinham a ajuda do estado e como foram buscar a ajuda do estado para obter proteção contra competidores. Também é interessante a parte sobre Theodore Roosevelt. The House of Morgan - Ron Chernow, em especial as partes sobre Pierpont tentar criar vários monopólios, sua relação com Roosevelt Theodore Roosevelt admitindo que o processo contra a Standard Oil foi político, não econômico: https://mises.org/library/progressive-era-0/html/c/623 notação 51

Here’s a quick breakdown of how real estate agents get paid. How do real estate agents get paid? 1. To answer that question, let’s first address who pays a real estate agent. Roughly 99% of the time, it’s the seller. In fact, in my 12 years as an agent, I can’t ever remember a transaction where the buyer paid an agent’s commission. This doesn’t mean it never takes place, but it’s not customary in our Northeast Florida market.  There are two portions of each commission the seller pays: the portion that goes to their listing agent and the portion that’s offered to any buyers’ agents in the area so that they bring in interested buyers.  2. All agents and brokerages have to abide by the Sherman Antitrust Act, which is intended to prevent price-fixing. In other words, it’s illegal for one real estate company to go to another company and establish an average commission rate for a transaction. If you ask an agent what the average commission is and they’re finicky about answering, that’s why. There is no such thing as an “average” commission. Each brokerage sets their own commission rate.  3. It’s also important to note that agents don’t get paid directly. The commission the seller pays goes straight to the agents’ brokerage. The agent is then paid a portion of the commission from the brokerage. So, different companies may have different commission rates. And different agents within the company may have different commission splits. This is another thing that’s negotiable.   “There’s a difference between what you pay and the value you receive.” 4. Finally, there is a difference between cost and value. Some agents might be a great “value” for the “cost.” Others, not so much. For example, Gardner Minshew II, the Jacksonville Jaguars’ current starting quarterback (though not for long), will make about $700,000 this year. He ranks 12th in terms of overall quarterback rating. One slot behind Tom Brady, but way ahead of Jared Goff of the Los Angeles Rams. Jared’s QBR ranks 27th in the league, but he stands to earn $26 million this year. Basically, the Jaguars are paying Minshew 37x less than what the Rams are paying Goff, and getting better overall results! That is to say, there’s a difference between what you pay and the value you receive. To find out what value an agent brings to the table, research their experience and performance history: how many homes they sell per year, how their sale price compares to each home’s list price, what their average days on market is, etc.  If you have any questions about this or any other real estate topic, don’t hesitate to reach out to me. I’d love to help you.

Antitrust Regulations - How Big Tech Companies Avoided Antitrust Regulation - Jim Rumford (Interview) Jim Rumford, author of Tobacco, Trusts, and Trump - How America's Forgotten War Created Big Government https://thetobaccowars.com/ https://www.intrinsicmotivation.life Jim Rumford is an entrepreneur, amateur historian, and CEO of Rumford Industrial Group. During the Tobacco Wars, Rumford's own Great-Grandfather, George Washington Kinney, was attacked by “Night Riders,” who also destroyed the family barns and tobacco crop. Rumford's other Great-Grandfather, George Washington Jett, was a “Night Rider” which brings a family dynamic into this story. To help prevent history from ever repeating itself, Kinney compiled one of the largest private collections of Tobacco Wars primary documents in the United States. At six years old, Rumford discovered these documents and has been telling his Great-Grandfather's story ever since. antitrust regulations - antitrust regulations should be reinterpreted for big tech, says appnexus founder. Find saving money tips with this Better Money Habits video Fox News Channel again beat its cable news rivals in the most recent quarter, but viewership was down almost across the board View CNN world news today for international news and videos from Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and the Americas US News is a recognized leader in college, grad school, hospital, mutual fund, and car rankings com for breaking news, videos, and the latest top stories in world news, business, politics, health and pop culture 4763 News Station jobs available on Indeed Watch FOX News Channel and FOX Business Network 24/7 live from your desktop, tablet and smart phone #antitrustregulations #antitrustlaw #trump #bigtobacco #techcompanies Top Questions about Tobacco, Trusts, and Trump: Why did the US government pass the Sherman Antitrust Act? Who enforces antitrust regulations? What was a consequence of violating the Sherman Antitrust Act? What is the purpose of the antitrust laws quizlet? How antitrust laws protect the public? What does the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibit? --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/intrinsic-motivation/support

EP178 - Chewy IPO and Listener Questions Part 2  Recap of Chewy IPO (Chewy S1) Listener Questions Part 2: Q5: Nick Barrett Would be really interested to hear your guys thoughts on how an established e-commerce store should expand into new product categories. Is it a good idea to launch new niche websites through Shopify to do this, or is it better to keep focus within a single e-commerce site and expand within that? Q6 Rebecca Saunders Have you seen any recent data on the costs of customer acquisition online via the various channels, and how these have changed over time? I hear a lot anecdotally but haven’t managed to access any reliable data. Thanks in advance! Love the show btw (all the way from rainy London). Q7 Amit Agarwal Have you ever done some research on e-commerce subscriptions such as amazon subscribe and save or autoship? Also, what is the industry trends for bark box, hello fresh and other bundle subscriptions? Q8: Parker Block  Hey Scot, What do you see as likely business implications of rising appetite for anti-trust action (see FTC/DOJ announcement , Lina Khan joining Congress staff, etc ) on platforms which monetize  consumer data ? Q9: Baxter Overman How do you put consumers at ease with in-home delivery services? (i.e. Walmart grocery). Wouldn’t drop-off when the customer is home for certain items (or lockers) be easier to sell? Q10 Aakash Gupta What’s your favorite app that you’ve downloaded in the last few months? Q11 Twitter: Natalie Dillon mentioned us as one of her top podcasts – thanks Natalie! Q12 Ted: Mixed use retail entertainment? Q 13 Michelle Grant  Thoughts on pricing strategy in an omnichannel world where price transparency is high and filled with bots to find the lowest price Q15 Melissa Burdick The advertising race to the wallet – We’ve seen some big news lately: Target in talks to buy Triad, Walmart who is bringing advertising in house and just made a key hire Suresh as their CTO….where is this going for ads?  Is it going to be a war for brands wallet? Is everyone going to take a page from the Amazon playbook, bring ads in house, and move to a self-service performance advertising, PPC world? Where is the $ coming/going to come from?  In the chart below, it looks like Amazon is taking from Google.  (I asked a big CPG this question and I asked where is this coming from – or are you just getting more $$?  Their answer – more $$). How should brands prepare? Q16 Melissa Burdick Is Amazon going to do to walgreens/bartells/CVS what they did to the bookstore (kill the bookstore to build a bookstore) with the acquisition of pill pack + private label (aspirin, etc) and enable the ability to sell mass CPG profitably? Q17 Melissa Burdick Can Scot please update his Amazon Scape – how has it changed? Q18 Melissa Burdick When is Spiffy coming to Seattle? Don’t forget to like our facebook page, and if you enjoyed this episode please write us a review on itunes. Episode 178 of the Jason & Scot show was recorded on Tuesday, June 18th, 2019. http://jasonandscot.com Join your hosts Jason “Retailgeek” Goldberg, Chief Commerce Strategy Officer at Publicis, and Scot Wingo, CEO of GetSpiffy and Founder and Executive Chairman of Channel Advisor as they discuss the latest news and trends in the world of e-commerce and digital shopper marketing. Transcript Jason: [0:24] Welcome to the Jason and Scott show this is episode 178 being recorded on Tuesday June 18th 2019 I’m your host Jason retailgeek Goldberg and as usual I’m here to host Scott Wingo. Scot: [0:38] He Jason and welcome back Jason Scott your listeners well we if you listen to good ol episode 177 we had so many listener questions we could not get to the mall. So this is kind of a episode 2 or continuation of that episode before we jump into a star questions though we a while ago on a new show about 30 days ago now we talked about the chewy S1 and since then she has gone Publix we wanted to give you a quick update on what’s going on with you once you take us to the Jason. Jason: [1:14] So they did their IP aware According to some Tuesday it was Friday do I have that right. And you’ll tell me if this is good or not I think it is the day they had announced a rainy a price range for the offering at like 19 and 21 bucks and they actually came out at $22. That’s a little higher than the range they have a lot of good activity and they closed closed event on Friday it was at 35 bucks which is like 80%. So That seems like a pretty successful offering at least compared with like all the the Uber news or the with news. Scot: [2:07] This is the only been one to one IPO process and you know what would they tell you you’re so far. Knock on wood so what they what they tell you is that the Brain Trust at Goldman Sachs these kind of place is you want to go to one school of thought and this is not with the bankers agree with so you have to kind of navigate your way through all this obviously you got a fox and how so she was here once thought is you price your I get the maximum because that’s what’s best for the company the bankers would tell you to look your building long-term shareholder relationships so you want to give these shareholders that take a risk in your company a little bit of a benefit so you price a little bit lower than kind of where you can look at Newburgh lift they both would be kind of what’s the bankers would say kind of broken IPOs where they traded below their IPO price therefore now if you’re someone that participate in IPO you feel sheepish because you came in it what was a $20 now it’s trading at 18 where is this true IPO performed a lot better in a bottle the bankers would recommend I said if you want to come to clear range up there can a price above that range slightly and then have kind of a good pop and then stay there and then come out with your results and then kind of beet raisin your off the races did you could do. [3:30] Secondary offerings happy happy shareholders by wear stockings all kinds of good things happen at kind of tend to think this is the way to do it and they did really well. Jason: [3:43] Yeah now a couple of things that make it particularly interesting in the the sort of Commerce retail world so folks may remember. Chewy was acquired by PetSmart a couple years ago and it was a big deal at the time I was over three billion dollar. Acquisition. And so a incident PetSmart is now spinning off chewy as a separate public company and so I Like You by. And read my notes correctly that that close kind of values the company at that north of 4 billion dollars. Weather so acquire company for 3 billion ticket public at 14 billion sounds like. Pretty exciting acquisition for acquisition and transaction for PetSmart do I have that right. Scot: [4:42] I guess yeah they’re kind of Phoenix it’s almost like a private Equity, think it’s unusual for a company to do what they did cuz usually you fold it in you. You get rid of the brand overtime you make it your eCommerce brand so so young to the degree they have integrated it you could argue it Kris Russell because you know now I’m Siri chewy could be acquired maybe I do think that they sell and over half so I think they can control that but let’s say they do a secondary in overtime their ownership get step know maybe they need to sell some swimming in debts and then let’s say doomsday scenario Amazon acquires chewy and your PetSmart that’s what’s running your e-commerce site then you can kind of have a you know really bad day for someone at PetSmart to listen to see what happens with that integration now that you have these kind of. The amoeba is being pulled apart here and and how does that work for PetSmart. Jason: [5:42] Yeah so that’s kind of what I was going was like from a pure Financial standpoint if we look at it as a banker like it’s it’s hard not to see this as a win but but for your point. [5:55] PetSmart was not a particularly digitally Savvy brick and mortar retailer prior to this acquisition so I can the time part of this acquisition was to bring more digital competency to PetSmart and once pain the PetSmart team arrived PetSmart like really abdicated digital responsibility to that team so like as far as I understand it. There are fewer. Digital people at PetSmart today than there were before the acquisition so they’ve they’ve essentially made themselves extra dependent on chewy and it’s now not clear. What. [6:36] Responsibility going forward she will have for PetSmart digital footprint like you can imagine they have a deal to run petsmart.com. I haven’t explicitly seen that but that that seems like a logical assumption but you know what happens with all the. The start of omni-channel things and you know when PetSmart wants to launch new services or they want to like Market the Veterinary Service veterinarian services that she doesn’t sell but PetSmart does through their stores. Like they’re certainly isn’t like a really strong digital team at PetSmart to be solving the. The start of Digital customer experiences for PetSmart so it it it does it feels to me like it definitely create some risk. For PetSmart and I’ll be interesting whether they they have like. Chewy braintrust walked up some how or whether they’re going to try to rebuild their own their own capability there I guess I just it’s an interesting. [7:36] I think to follow so I found that interesting and then my assumption is that the kind of felt like they had to do it because. The the one interesting thing about the chewy idea that we haven’t mentioned is that that chewy is losing money, and like despite some like phenomenal hockey stick. Customer acquisition growth and sales growth and they have over three years they went from under a billion dollars to 3.5 billion dollars on sales they still haven’t found their way to profitability so your PetSmart you own this fast-growing money-losing venture. And you used a lot of debt to buy them so like. That they’re not helping you pay down the debt you used to buy them because they’re losing money by doing that idea o u stand up a bunch of cash in my understanding is the whole IPO like. Like tried to raise about a billion dollars and 900 million of that went straight to death from the PetSmart acquisition so for your point like it sounds like going public makes it easier to do subsequent raises. So maybe that. The way to bring more operating cash. Chewy but like there’s not a billion dollars in the bank as a result of this IPO that you can have spend on marketing that they didn’t have last year. [8:58] It’s all very interesting is going to be interesting to watch watch how it all plays out and then I guess the other thing is fun for me and you cover this on a previous show a little bit but like. In the process of going public May disclose a bunch of details that we don’t normally get to see and so I know there’s some interesting metrics that came out. They they do a really good cohort analysis of a evaluate. How sticky their customers are from each year that they acquire them and how valuable those customers are in so they have a like in their filings they have a nice what we call a wedding cake kind of showing. Each of those previous years cohorts. Growing in value over time and have some really favorable long-term metrics our customer retention is amazing a big chunk of their customers are on subscriptions are longer-term customers are continuing to spend more and so like. In general they’re having to spend a lot of money to acquire each new customer but the the lifetime value of those customers like is a significant multiple of that customer acquisition cost, so it just spend together inside peek at a pretty big size e-commerce business. Scot: [10:14] Yeah you know the history of e-commerce is littered with companies that they do all this math off of cackle TV and they’re using kind of known LTV, acquire new customers off that no nail TV and then at some point you get through your lines cut across and that LTD of that new customer surprisingly goes down over time because the early days you’re you’re bring in these these early adopters their Advocates they stick around and then the Slater customers you acquire you know maybe they’re just sampling and that kind of thing so it’ll be interesting to see. At the same time Irwin size applying data science and machine learning all his new technologies to try to fight all this in the sea. How to do another big thing when you go public as you have to decide. Which of these metrics are going to publish Schnitzer it’s pretty tricky thing cuz you kind of you know you kind of have to think well metric out there instructions down that’s bad so you can you can actually have a much different and you should have different kind of TV is you put out this one versus on your quarterly so will cover the first quarterly and no be interesting to see if they if they continue with a really transparent Buick faculty because that’s one they had some really good date on them. Jason: [11:31] Yeah it’ll be fun to see. Scot: [11:33] Cool swell I’m springing this on you but did you have a chance to look at the big Facebook crypto announcement today Libra new crypto-currency. Jason: [11:45] Yeah you should have spring stuff on me cuz you know I did all day so I just rushed to the hotel room to get to chat with you so tell us about. Scot: [11:57] Well I’ll just point point listeners to it the immediate reaction from Regulators was oh heck no so the other side quotes from the EU and both parties in the US saying we’re not really sure we trust Facebook with this so that that’s kind of I’m still adjusting it and it looks like they had a big team here the guy that got from PayPal but they put on chats Dave music. He’s leading this so it’s a big pretty big initiative at Facebook it’s what’s called a constant. Constant coin so it it’s kind of going to an individual value versus versus the US dollar does versus floating around the reason the white paper it looks like it’s going. It’s going after being a payment mechanism, like miles and that kind of thing for people. Within the Facebook Network they do have several people that have signed on to this kind of governing body eBay was announced today is also looking at it location being that the company Side dance this governing body will ultimately takes this currency along with the u.s. dollar other payments down the road so it just feels like it’s the payment thing to watch to see how it goes. Jason: [13:23] So do you think the the Winklevoss twins will be all in in this will be the Zuckerberg Winklevoss reunions. Scot: [13:29] That direction was an article where they have had something to do with it I know that’s compliment you can find them. [13:45] I think that they were asked to apine on it because they they have put a lot of stuff into the crypto thing. Jason: [13:53] I don’t know what we’ll see how it all plays out like superficially. I I simultaneously and surprise and admire Facebook’s ability to sort of ignore their currents. Situation and launching new products so I do I do feel like. Visa V the other big technology giants like Facebook is it the biggest sort of trust deficit of all of them and yet they continue to launch products that like. At the core require like this really strong level of consumer trust for adoption so launching portal and putting like on microphone and camera and everyone’s living room and the launching of cryptocurrencies likes that there’s some hotspot doing those kind of launches when it it it feels like you’re you’re not exactly killing it in terms of earning your user stress. Scot: [14:44] Okay one of our one of our many interns just look this up and they actually it so Facebook had talked to the Zuckerberg they have an exchange called Gemini and they’re not sure they’re to work together but the Winklevoss folks said you know it’s time to let bygones be bygones and waste will probably be Frenemies so if you’re very Millennial wait till dresses. Jason: [15:07] Let’s jump into listener questions. [15:19] Questionnaire questionnaire questionnaire questions. Scot: [15:24] Yes sir we are so we covered for last time so I can start out here with number 5 this was from Nick Barrett and it came through Facebook I believe Nick is from Australia or New Zealand so I don’t know if that puts it in context but there you go I think he works for this company called Mighty ape which is kind of like GameStop it’s like an FYE but an American kind of context to hear your guys thoughts and I’ll and established e-commerce store could expand in a new product categories is it a good idea to launch new Niche websites to Shopify to do this or is it better to keep Focus within a single e-commerce site and expand with a nut I’ll take a stab at this kind of depends so I’ll use a I use a metaphor here of orbits right so so at the at the at the center of this orbit is your existing customer in your existing e-commerce experience I think customers will. Pretty easily let you go one or two orbits out you start to go three or four orbits out then you really need to start thinking about that customers buying experience and the messaging it doesn’t make sense to have it going to tie it to something on a closer orbit to what you’re doing today so use example it looks like a Mighty Eighth the selling games Collectibles those kinds of things so. [16:50] You know another example of a store like yours is ThinkGeek here in the US and you’ll think he did a really good job of starting with your muesli. [17:00] Kind of collectible stuff and then bringing in toys stand life-size figures and then they going deep into categories so then in the store are they and the lion to have a pretty, deep Star Wars category a Harry Potter category Etc and then online and license the brands and then there’s there’s actually extra deep in this category So within the Star Wars world. They did, cleverly came up with a sleeping bag that looks like a tan tan and so they they kind of got so deep into this vertical they’re actually kind of able to come up with their own products around that. But you wouldn’t go in there expecting to find a non geechie pizza oven or something strange like that so so you know. [17:49] Two to the same argument if if you guys wanted to add kind of your you know you’re on private label Collectibles I’ll keep that in the main side what say you wanted to get into something totally out of what you’re doing today like I don’t know Sporting Goods or hammocks or something like that then I do think you know having another e-commerce site is the way to do it you know what. Yeah what you didn’t necessarily but all all kind of kind of keep replying to thread is how do you find what to add in this is where it’s really interesting set a channel advisor we have 3000 customers and the overwhelming majority of them are Supernatural and it’s always fascinating to me to find out how they. Figure out what products to sell a lot of them spend a lot of time date of money so don’t go through comments feedback on products they look at no search results that’s a cool place on your own website to go find things you’re what are people searching for on your website and not fighting that’s really interesting kind of area to learn a lot about consumer Behavior a lot of them use tools like camelcamelcamel this one called jungle Scout and then there you can go look at Amazon’s data my favorite example it won’t surprise listeners is a Star Wars example so these guys are our customer and they like. [19:10] Like kind of a GameStop in FYE Etc solo Star Wars stuff and they’re trying to look for new products they had a license with Lucas sounds do what do they had the image of Han Solo Carbonite that they put on almost everything they did a phone case but it started poking around and using some his tools they win the Star Wars category of Amazon Founders All these people looking for Star Wars beach towels yo when you’re out in your bathing suits on the beach you’re always so obviously want to Star Wars down so they came out with Han Solo in carbonite on a beach towel you are really big one so it looks like it’s on the beach cuz she’s there. And that became a top selling product on Amazon very quickly and they should develop that product by looking at null search results in finding those little imbalances between supply and demand that people are looking for a date use that create a product extension anchor so ankers electronics company in there is. Picture in China or Taiwan they started mining the Amazon feedback and people would buy. [20:23] Chargers and accessories and Illinois say one glad this has two USB ports but I have 6 devices looking at you Jason and you know I really wish you had a a charge faster and be it had reports. I think a lot of the anchor kind of lease early products were developed off skimming and parsing and really understanding the Amazon product feedback and then saying alright this product at 3 stars why can we develop a product. Our own just got five stars in address to Consumers. Jason: [20:58] Yeah and I mostly agree a side note on anchor like I literally have to have anchor products delivered to a email stop because my wife has banned me from buying Morty. Totally has my number. And one piece of bad news for you Scott I don’t know if you’re aware of this but I think was purchased by GameStop and effective July 2nd they’re shutting it down. Scot: [21:23] Oh man I didn’t know that. Jason: [21:25] Yeah so it’s not going to be a a section of a GameStop versus a separate site so. Scot: [21:32] Mulligan artist closes stores. Jason: [21:35] I don’t know maybe per your point and M4 Next original question again GameStops hoping to. Aggregate that traffic from their side and Think Geek and do more effective cross-selling because they. Basically I agree with your answer but I would almost come to it from the opposite and I would just say, it’s extremely hard there very few businesses that can be very profitable by selling a single item in a car and there are very few businesses that can be profitable by only selling an item once to a customer and so in general you’re looking for businesses where you have multiple products for the customer put in in your reason for the test come back and shot from you multiple times and so to me that means. Looking at your existing existing customer base as you suggested and finding adjacent products that might also appeal to those those customers. In the early days of e-commerce there was this artificial thing. SEO from Google search engine optimization bring much favored keyword stuffing in the URL and so you saw a lot of. [22:48] Individual sites that were selling one item in the name that URL after the item they were selling and that him for a while that that could be very effective Google’s dramatically depreciated the the effect of keywords in the URL so you know it now makes more sense to aggregate as much traffic you as you can on a single URL and sell a bunch of stuff but what I would suggest is having a lot of different content for that different stuff in different landing pages for that different stuff so for your point you’re selling Video Star Wars video games over here at Star Wars beach towels over there you might have separate landing pages for those two and you might have separate like digital marketing campaigns for those two so it kind of feels like a separate site in that sense but once you get there and get that beach towel I can I can try to cross sell you the video games and try to make you up a bigger more valuable. Does I guess that’s that’s the way I would think of. Scot: [23:43] Yeah it’s kind of fun fact two big companies were created off that crazed were you just putting one product on a domain name hayneedle and Wayfair Wayfair had like coffee tables kitchen tables dining chairs that all these Furniture things and you go to dining chairs if you like just dining chairs slice of the things they ended up ruling all that stuff up both of them did and and getting rid of that strategy one. Question number 6 is from Rebecca Saunders have you seen any recent data on the cost of customer acquisition so this is a question which we just kind of chewy online via the various channels and how these are changed over time I hear a lot and it totally but haven’t managed to access any reliable data thanks in advance love the show by the way all the way from rainy London. Jason: [24:34] Well thanks for the question Rebecca on answering from rainy Seattle today good night my SAT answer is. Generally know why there are people that publish short of some industry data on customer acquisition that I would submit to you that it’s almost completely useless because. The variance depending on the specific industry in the specific customer circumstances are so great that looking at these. Averages are are somewhat meaningless and so you know you both have like. Companies that are selling individual packs of Band-Aids you know for $3 online and guess what your customer acquisition cost has to be extremely low when you’re selling a $3 item with free shipping. And you have customer selling $10,000 diamond rings and. Not surprisingly that the customer acquisition cost can be much higher for that if you’re a company that’s already doing billions of dollars in sales right you. To get meaningful growth you have to reach a really broad audience and that tends to be more expensive per user for customer acquisition if you’re a small startup. You can very cost-effectively acquire some really valuable customer so your customer acquisition ends up being a lot lower so. [26:03] As much as I’d love to point you in a particular resource and say hey just check out these numbers. I guess I really don’t feel like other companies numbers are in less than a direct competitor of yours somehow are likely to be that useful to you I will tell you you know what I was digging into that chewy S1 a little bit and for example in 2017 chewy added about 3.7 million new customers in the matted 3.8 million new customers in 2018 but that’s 2017 customers they spent about 60 bucks a customer to acquire around and for this 2018 customers they spent $101 a customer. So there are not a lot of businesses that are much smaller in scale than chewy that could afford that kind of. Customer acquisition cost but if you look at Chuy’s lifetime value and the dispenza previous cohorts if these new cohorts Behavior chewy the way the previous ones that has a Scott sort of alluded to earlier then like even spending $100 a customer could be. A tapered an investment like a it’s a risky one so so we’re going to have to wait and see but I would definitely not look at Chuy’s numbers and go oh gosh for my business I should spend a hundred bucks a customer because it works. Scot: [27:22] Yeah and dumb ass gets in dead to your point the reason it’s hard to compare your business when Elsa’s you’re not only are you different categories you know Supernatural businesses where they essentially say look if I can spend a dollar and make 3 I will I will consider it almost cogs and I will have an unlimited budget. Other people kind of say you’re the kind of come from an advertising View and they took people to come from marketplaces they tend to have that cogs kind of totality cuz they’re looking at it as a percentage of sales people that come at it from the ADI to SeaWorld they’re looking at a return on ad spend the inverse of a Crepes and they’ll say look I’m going to have a budget and demands that budget to a 4X or whatever it is returned my dad stood socially really part of its Theology and and and some of it is other times I’ve seen really big companies for the CEO says I want to be number one to strollers and then you say well that’s insanely. Expensive in your money I want to be number one in strollers and. [28:37] It doesn’t matter cuz when the boss looks at strollers and your shoulders not there you’re going to get fired so you don’t really care what he’s done or you know they are building a Brandt and they don’t really care about a transactional kind of a Roi on on the stent there so it’s a hard hard to nail down. And it does kind of depend in my experience where people come from if they come from that ad world of that Marketplace Road. [29:06] What’s your view on return on that seventies. Jason: [29:10] Yeah I mean I tend to be sort of green eyeshade out of about it I I like to have a pretty short return on ad spend to make the investment the. Because frankly like the more expensive the customer is to acquire the least likely the customer is to be very loyal so in general I like those customers I can earn organically and cultivate a lot more than the customers that I have to go out and by so like you know for sure Mary meters suggestion I’d way rather have some sort of freemium model what I have customers coming to me and find the use my product for free on a limited basis and then turn them into paid customers and and sort of do growth hacking then spend a fortune buying a customer and trying to monetize those that being said I work for a giant ad company and that’s mostly what we. What we do. [30:13] Spend a bunch of money to to acquire customers and it absolutely can work. It’s not again it it’s somewhat related to your risk profile and. And comfort level I will say the one thing one nice thing about being a small company a lot of my clients are very large and and they have to acquire huge audiences and. The markets that have huge audiences that have inventory or tend to be pretty efficient so it’s really hard to get a good deal but one of the nice things about being a small company is you can play in a lot of small customer acquisition formats where the market isn’t very efficient yet and you can. I often get outside return so no being a in early player on Instagram when people weren’t advertising on Instagram was a great way to make money or being a you know a really excellent executor on Pinterest or even like fractional television versus heading to buy Super Bowl spots or different things like that like there are definitely ways to sort of piecemeal together audiences to get an outside return as long as you can get by with a a relatively modest audience size but you know as soon as you get into having a choir or million new customers a year to hit your numbers. You’re you’re pretty much stuck thing the market rate for customer acquisition. Scot: [31:42] Yeah where it where I’ve seen small businesses get upside down on this is day they take care of an Amazon eBay way of looking at things the applied to Google and they kind of think all right eye I just spent 20% took Wireless customer and then what they don’t realize is the next time that customer comes to they’re going to probably come through Google so now and then now you had another drink song that one in so I know what you’re saying is if you think you’re acquiring a customer for a hundred Google and you’re getting a $300 kind of LTD with them they’re heading Google twice more and you’re paying another couple hundred bucks. Upside down you really look like to have to get especially with the CPC stuff and and you have to be real careful with with how your measure know that. [32:28] Question number 7 this is from a bit Agarwal have you ever done some research on e-commerce subscription such as Amazon subscribe and save our auto-ship also what is industry trends for BarkBox hellofresh and other subscriptions. Jason: [32:42] Great question I’ll be curious what Scott’s answer is because I’m always looking for better data in this category than I have in general I would say like there is not a lot of traffic data it’s it’s the usual story like they’re these. Third-party data aggregators that do things that customer surveys and things to try to give us some data or there’s the universe Creek receipt scrapers like 1010data or slice a rocket and they can give us some insight into like. Amazon subscribe and save is performing versus individual products but. Those are like directional it best I haven’t seen awesome data there there’s one of the reasons that you yes one was kind of fun Chuy’s and I ever get with their trade name is for their subscription program. [33:38] 67% of all Chuy’s Revenue comes from the subscription program in as we talked about in one of the previous answers you know the real key to to profitability in an e-commerce business is about. Repeat purchases and customer retention and like there’s no better flavor of customer retention then auto-ship and so like. I’m a big fan of the tactic I haven’t always had the best third-party data to validate that tactic. The second half of your question I will I will say, yeah you asked about some of the the well-known subscription offers out there like BarkBox and hellofresh. [34:21] There’s a general sense. It’s been hard to scale those subscription services and that customer retention hasn’t been awesome and so there’s this phenomenon called subscription fatigue and in general the subscription Services tend to have a lot of churn so they don’t maintain all of last year’s subscriptions and a bunch of new ones and so there’s kind of a dirty little secret amongst the. The companies we tend to think of as subscription companies that are successful and that dirty little secret is most of them have an offering that’s not subscription-based that’s on the man ordering. And the bulk of the revenue tends to come from that on demand order so you know Stitch fix the bulk of their revenue is from. Young people that are ordering a fixes on demand rather than have a a a recurring a box coming all the time and in the. [35:22] My understanding is the BarkBox and Dollar Shave Club and Harry’s have all had like three big turn on their subscription list I think when the hair is got a choir that came to light that 80% of Harry’s Revenue was from there. Their retail deals are people walking in at Target and buying Harry’s Razors rather than being on the the the subscription program so I would say like subscriptions are really valuable thing to try to achieve and there definitely is evidence that Amazon’s program is really potent seems like chewy has a really potent program but you know you probably need to be careful about assuming it’s easy or that you’ll have great great customer retention from doing. Scot: [36:05] Yeah. I think that spot on a couple editions it it seems to work well in anything that’s replenishable I do think it’s kind of jumped the shark like I I see tons of News subscription programs for coffee and beer and wine just feels like we’re probably Pastor the subscription craze. If you’re interested in the topic that you know again one of the nerdy things I recommend is when companies go public and they file that S1. [36:36] That that is like a gold mine of data and it’s if you’re interested in these topics if you can find a company that has Nest one out there it’s really a good read because you’re you’re dealing with these companies that have managed a business cycle were talking about up to the point where it’s at a pretty good scale so so so they’re kind of on Generation 8 thinking and yeah that’s the guy you got started on Generation 1 thinking right live red and really enjoyed Stitch fix I would say you know there is a lot of negative cinnamon around Stitch fix prove the critics pretty wrong with the success they’ve had there is one is a really really good read and then when I when you read an s-1. [37:22] It’s kind of like a poop sandwich so so you know the where the bread is the poop in the good stuff’s on inside you have kind of dig in and find it the the part you want to read on this one and Skip all the way to Management’s discussion and and they’re in the Stitch fix one it’s a textbook on how they think about their cohorts and and how they fight this Trends Jason’s talking about how do you know how do you make the algorithm better and how do you also scale it with with computers instead of just people so I recommend that a good Counterpoint is Blue Apron went public and has not been successful so in a reading their ass one it’s really interesting because you know. [38:08] It’s not as strong and it’s not as clear that they’re actually getting in front of the sky turn problems so that’s a good one and then if you’re interested in the food deliveries area GrubHub is public and I find their public stuff to be very interesting as well. A good reading it going back to this one in either Coeur d’Alene updates her are so it’s hopefully that gives you something to chew on a it is hard to find a lot of like the previous couple folks asked about CAC LTV out there I like reading a case of a prospective cuz it really. Gives you an idea of how these teams are thinking about things and and I learned like a thousand things from repossessed one so I think that’s one of the best areas to go research the subscription program if you’re interested. Jason: [38:59] Yep and it just occurred to me there’s one other point we kind of touched on I’m the last person to call episode that I’ll just reiterate there’s certain segments that are much more mature and subscriptions and so that’s Professional Services and digital subscriptions Regza think Netflix Amazon Prime you know subscriptions to publishing companies Wall Street Journal newspaper all those sorts of things and if you look at how those industry of olives a couple of interesting things have happened. These aggregators have emerged because customers have subscription fatigue and their subscriptions are fragmented everywhere and it’s really annoying so you now have Amazon with a service where you do all your media subscriptions through them and they give you a single dashboard to turn on and off subscriptions and control them. [39:54] Apple just wants to be similar offering the financial institutions have noticed that people locking all the subscriptions they spend a fortune and they don’t tend to use a lot of the subscription so every budgeting tool out there like mint like a big feature that they offer is identifying all these recurring. Cost and continue to turn off all the ones that you probably aren’t using and I think that’s now a national television campaign for. Wells Fargo is they have a feature in their mobile app called control tower which is all about helping people like turn off the. [40:29] The dearth of subscriptions they signed up for not getting value from so like give you. [40:36] Use that as sort of a time machine and you let you know it’s it’s probably unlikely in the future you want a copy subscription with one vendor and a water filter subscription with another vendor and you know and have all these things coming on different schedules and on different payment periods and you know it. To me that’s one of my Amazon subscribe and save the big advantages is there started the de facto everything subscription aggregator for physical Goods. Scot: [41:04] How many active subscriptions do you have Jason. Jason: [41:08] So I’ll be honest I am not the biggest personal fan of that there is huge convenience but I do find that I waste a lot of money when I do their subscriptions and stuff tends to pile up so I’m not a huge fan my my wife does a lot of our household management and she’s way more organized than me so she uses a bunch and I I couldn’t tell you how many she has. Scot: [41:31] Is that work that has like around 20 and he has an Amazon credit card and it says so they’ve gotten every kind of replenishable thing in their house that like kids can I come from Amazon if he’s done some calculus on it and it’s like the optimal savings for a little leverage on the on the Amazon Prime card. Jason: [41:50] Side note taking a deeper dive in this answer than we intended to but the today most of these subscriptions and most Auto replenishment is what I call explicit like you go and sign up for something and you have to ask for it and pull it. And it starts coming until you get around and turning it off but I do think the future for a lot of this physical goods are implicit replenishment where. If if you do most of your spending on Amazon or you do most of your purchases on Walmart like they they just get enough. Data about your habits you proactively. Send you the stuff when you need it without you even having to ask and both Walmart and Amazon have had various packet patents on this this idea of predictive shipping in that it does seem to me that like combination of big data and artificial intelligence in this face that like their there’s going to be in near future when a lot more of this purchasing is autonomous and the reason that’s interesting to me is. You know when you never have to think about ordering toilet paper again or buying toilet paper because your your house just always has the right amount for the paper what do all the physical stores that today have an entire aisle of the grocery store dedicated to toilet paper do that space so it’s like there’s an interesting challenge for brick-and-mortar retailers in the future as Auto replenishment gets more dominant. Scot: [43:16] All right question to break comes from Parker block he always throws curve balls we appreciate that Parker this one came from LinkedIn hey Jason Scott what do you see as likely business implications of rising a Type 4 antitrust action on platforms which monetize consumer data. I think she’s just a little bit in the last episode but a lot of the platform’s especially ones with user-generated content like Facebook Twitter Google search YouTube they rely on the section of law code section 230 which essentially makes thumb the same as a utility like like a phone line if you if you say something on the phone line that could be sheet Suites or something like that you know it’s not AT&T job to monitor that so say since we say we are not a newspaper where I your you have liability around what is it libel in was written once. [44:20] Slander libel and slander you can be sued if you say the wrong thing she actually very careful with what you say that’s why they have fact-checkers they say look this is just a platform we’re just kind of here I am so happens but as they increasingly are kind of changing and and. People offer what they say it is interesting to see should they still be within section 230 so that’s one interesting area another one is Noah senior up get really aggressive with these do not follow laws gdpr and you know all these kinds of things I I do think there’s going to be increasing appetite I’m not hugely political and. The times I had to kind of watch that stuff you always shake your head like when Zuckerberg was in front of Congress and they had like no idea you know the problem is our Representatives have no idea how this stuff works so slow. Do anything that I just I’m not optimistic that it makes any sense what I shall do so I have to see. The other thing I will say is there’s a lot of people Scott Galloway is really big on this on kind of breaking up Amazon and it a lot of people kind of gunning for Amazon it’s not really in the spirit of your question which surround customer day. [45:38] I’m sure Jason has deeper thoughts on that everything about Amazon is a monopoly there has to be someone the consumer being hurt you know usually have Rising prices when you have a monopoly with like the power company or something Amazon is lowered prices so and you know if you look at it. Their ownership of retail it’s very small e-commerce store at 50% so yeah that’s pretty big but you know you have Walmart got to swing an atom if if you if you took antitrust action at Amazon you know most certainly have to Walmart because Walmart has such a big share of much bigger share of offline and I feel like Amazon’s probably be okay and I think Facebook Google Twitter are prime or in the crosshairs because of the section 230 stuff and then the fact he’s ad models are built off of tracking across internet I think they going to have double risk there that will be nurse to watch. Jason: [46:33] Yep this is the way I sort of think of it there’s a couple categories of Regulation like they’re there are business models that various government entities. [46:46] Might want to influence by writing new laws and so that’s what all this privacy stuff is right like they’re you know you’re up isn’t trying to in for some some fifty-year-old privacy law. Against Google and Facebook they wrote a new I called gdpr specifically to change the behavior about how companies collect consumer data and use it the. You know there’s lots of new laws that get proposed for you know regulating energy companies and and how they influence the Earth and all these various things so a lot of these companies have risk that that dries, countries will pass new laws so you’re up obviously passed a Big Lot in the gdpr that as meaningful impact on how I’m we all do data collection for people and personalization there is a proposed law in California called the California consumer privacy act on which is very similar to gdpr and that goes into effect, you know it it’s sort of difficult to treat customers in California wildly different than the rest of the United States in California such a big Market that it could potentially have the effect of having companies serving us consumers behaving very similar to companies that are serving. [48:07] European consumers because they they just won’t want to risk getting Sideways from the the CCPA so. I do think that the biggest impact of those kinds of regulations is companies chains self moderating the their behaviors to not make it a necessity for a legislator to pass these laws and it’s. [48:29] In a legislative bodies aren’t super efficient it’s really hard. That’s why I was frankly and so you know you wouldn’t you wouldn’t have big expectation that like the US Congress is going to you know suddenly the House and Senate are going to agree on a bunch of stuff and pass a bunch of new new regulation and so it’s it’s more that they’re going to threaten regulation in that causes companies to like somewhat moderate their behavior. It is absolutely true that Europe is more aggressive than this right in regulation right now and so like it’s more likely that you that European regulation affects us companies then. Then you know that we’re going to see a huge wave of new u.s. regulation so that’s my long-winded answer on writing new laws and then purr. Scott’s point in the case of companies that whose primary business model is selling stuff that consumers there are t. Is regulation in prokaryotes that’s called the antitrust laws at the Sherman Act and so it’s it’s a less about Congress writing a new law that would have some negative impact on Amazon and more about how the US antitrust laws affect Amazon in first God’s point but the laws are. Like arguably someone outdated you both have to be in Monopoly and despite how big amazon is there really not. [49:53] The majority of very many markets right like they might be that the largest Bookseller in the u.s. I’m so so digital books could be a potential Market. If you could get a court to agree that e-commerce is a market separate from retail then you know you could argue that they’re up for ality even then there be arguments that they really aren’t cuz even though we say they’re 50% of e-commerce that doesn’t include some. Some huge businesses like marketplaces and pouring and all these other things the and in the second prompt per Scott’s point is once you’re a monopolist you you have to do behavior that negatively affects consumers in an amp us antitrust law that behavior is you have to raise prices and so you can’t just make the argument that oh my gosh Amazon’s reducing choice and that is fundamentally bad for consumers in Europe they have antitrust laws like that and so it’s it’s frankly at the moment a lot more likely that. European Regulators like impact how Amazon can grow as they get as big in Europe as they are here than it is that us antitrust law is going to be very effective against Amazon because they just don’t look like a a monopolist and then they they don’t sort of trigger any of the hot atoms of of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Scot: [51:19] Alrighty number 9 this comes from Baxter Overman how do you put super cities within Home Delivery Services IE Walmart grocery wouldn’t drop off when the consumer is home for certain items are lockers be easier to sell. Jason: [51:36] Yeah it was so one service that just got an ounce in the last couple weeks. Involved in last couple weeks is this Walmart delivered a fridge door and that’s kind of what I think of when you asked this question and so that the principle here is hey you order milk from Walmart you don’t want that like sitting on the curb for 8 hours while you’re at work. It’s a Walmart has this offering where we’re like using an electronic lock they have permission to go in your house they go in your kitchen and they have employees that are trained. Put away your groceries for you including putting the perishables in the fridge in the. This was a big deal they made it their shareholders meeting a couple weeks ago and they had a video of Mark Lori doing the first delivery and when they first proposed this service like a year ago the idea was that they would install cameras in the customer’s home in the customer would be able to monitor the delivery guy on the camera this year what the evolution is the delivery guys wear a body Cam and so you can watch everything the delivery guys doing while he’s in your house so they had Mark Lori wearing a body body cam. [52:44] Delivering groceries to Consumers house and I do think some of those tactics like the body can can help. Instill trust like I do think there’s a major trust issue here like I don’t think the Walmart service is going to be a. A huge mainstream service I think there’s some niches where it might appeal to but I always chuckle because. In this Walmart video I’d be intent is seeing marks wearing a body cam so you can trust him so you have nothing to worry about and in my head I’m thinking Mark what is worth like two billion dollars the one guy that’s not likely to steal any of my students. [53:23] He probably didn’t need a camera at like there’s probably nothing in my house that he wants that he doesn’t already have so that that’s my my sarcastic answer. Scot: [53:33] If you hard boil a nurse problem-solve. Jason: [53:36] Yeah yeah so when it’s the. Scot: [53:38] Not enough of them. Jason: [53:39] Exactly I buy Cuban would do some deliveries. Like trust is the big impediment here in in you so you see lots of interim step so I Amazon has this very robust program called Amazon key and it both. As a version where guys can open the Smart Lock and put stuff just inside your door they put stuff inside your door as opposed to all the way in your kitchen so there it’s slightly less invasive and so maybe you press them more but the I’ve been told that the big version of chi that’s really popular is customers aren’t willing to give give Amazon delivery drivers access to their home but they’re willing to give them access to the garage so in a lot more customers have an electronic garage door opener and then have an electronic lock on the front door so there’s a lots of places where the Amazon delivery guy can deliver the packages inside your garage and that’s easier to have trust in there’s also a business-to-business component to key where Amazon installs the Lockers in. [54:42] Commercial buildings and obviously you have a lot more trust giving giving a delivery guy access to your secure Lobby than you do your individual house so I feel like they’re all these different tiers of trust but the one thing I would say is overtime as the services get more popular and more people use them and have good experiences There’s an opportunity for trust to grow and so when. Uber and Lyft first launch trust was a huge impediment I’m I going to get in some random strangers car today we all no lots of other people that successfully use Uber and so it seems less scary and and you know even more so with Airbnb as we have more people in our networks that. Regular use Airbnb and have good outcomes it feels safer to me and so in the same way if Walmart is able to find. A decent-sized niche that’s willing to do this refrigerator delivery service and I have to get out. He’ll probably share that experience with their neighbors and friends and you could see the service grow and get more trustworthy over. Scot: [55:49] Yes I don’t have a beautiful answer. Number 10 also from LinkedIn this Crumbs from Akash Gupta and what’s your favorite app that you downloaded in the last few months. Jason. Jason: [56:10] So my can’t rain answers I don’t like apps that there’s all kinds of data that we like apps have huge abandonment rate and so for most clients I’m actually advocating they build really good mobile websites that replace the functionality of a nap and that’s using a technology called Progressive web app so that’s my sort of boring work answer in my personal life the app that I recently downloaded that I had no idea existed that’s been really useful for me is it’s actually a plug-in for the mobile browsers so it’s a plug-in called screenshots and essentially What it lets me do is when I’m on a mobile web page it lets me take a screenshot of the entire webpage not just the the part that’s visible above the full and so it for work a lot I need. Screenshots of an entire entire page and sewed this was a new fine for me that I tend to be using a lot but. I’m not that can be pretty itchy. Scot: [57:12] It’s good I would say at at spiffy we use this thing called geckoboard and they just updated their app. And up so gives me all my kpi is in one what kind of screen which is nice. Jason: [57:29] What’s the app for the Star Wars experience in Disney if you like that should be our favorite app. Scot: [57:36] Play Galaxy’s Edge I don’t I don’t know if it’s a blister not you so I didn’t download the Amazon go Store app. Okay this is just a comment over on Twitter Natalie Dylan and she is at Maverick witch you like this Jason that’s the VC firm started by Howard Schultz founder of Starbucks to invest in consumer-oriented companies she mentioned just as one of her top podcast that was a typo at first but I’m pretty sure she actually meant us so wow I was speechless. Jason: [58:11] That’s very cool Natalie if you’re listening I’d like to think that I have some partially funded your child’s college education so thank you very much for that. Scot: [58:20] Did the Starbucks usage. Jason: [58:22] Exactly. Scot: [58:22] I think we’re now Pisco effectively at this question number 12 this comes from our friend Ted down in Austin he said make sure Jason talks about mixed-use retail entertainment I don’t know what that is but I’m glad you get to answer. Jason: [58:38] Yeah I mean. In general like in the 1960s when the mall was first invented the the appeal of the mall was there a bunch of sores aggregated that you all wanted to get get tune so you know we built a big building and surrounded it with a giant parking lot and and put a bunch of stores together in overtime we added things to that mall that made it even the game customers another reason to go and spend more time there so for those indoor malls that was things like ice rinks and movie theaters in food courts and as. [59:16] That the collection of the stores has become less and less appealing and it’s been less and less valuable that drive traffic just buy this assortment of stores a lot of these venues have had to get more persuasive with the non-retail things that they put them all so you know the food courts have have often been replaced or augmented with more significant fine dining and today like a mixed-use small almost certainly means like in addition to shopping and entertainment that there’s probably a residential component to and so you know you can live in an apartment building that’s like upstairs from the stores or adjacent to the stores and like I would argue even Hudson yard is a classic example of a mix you space there’s both a significant residential component of these various condo Towers that are adjacent to it like and there’s these entertainment features in it like the Skydeck in the that the stairway installation is named I’m forgetting at the moment and so in general. [1:00:28] New successful shopping destinations 10 to have the this this multi-use component and let’s focus on shopping meme only reason that you’d go visit at so I assume that’s what that’s talking about. You won’t see many new balls built that aren’t like very focused on the the other traffic generation activities on the other revenue streams besides. Scot: [1:00:53] That’s not sorry. Jason: [1:00:55] Well but we haven’t what’s the name of the. Scot: [1:00:57] The Vessel. Jason: [1:00:58] That’s all thank you. Scot: [1:00:59] Yes take a walk in the vessel okay alright Michelle Grant has a twofer one is should Amazon be worried about broken up I feel like we asked and answered that one did you want to comment on that. Jason: [1:01:14] I think we covered it pretty well right based on current US antitrust I think Amazon has very little risk like they I think potentially digital books could be in area where you can see some enforcement or like I might have said like Amazon web services is it greater risk lucky I feel I can Google and Microsoft have made enough action lately that that you know that that probably isn’t immediate in Amazon where to get as big in Europe as they are in the US it would be more interesting question. But I like I’m defending companies in the US I think Amazon has a lot less to worry about from regulation then does a Facebook or do. Scot: [1:01:57] Cool and then this is clearly in your wheelhouse cuz it’s got the O word you’re Jason what are your thoughts on pricing strategy in an omni-channel world where price transparency is high and filled with Bots to find the lowest price. Jason: [1:02:15] Yeah so there is a bunch of controversy about pricing right now like lots of omni-channel retailers don’t have Universal pricing so they might have a different price in every store the online price might be different than the store price you know a complicated retailer like Walmart there could be five prices for every item there to be a store price there to be a ship to home price there could be a ship-to-store price there could be a pickup in-store price and online grocery pick-up price and you know Walmart slogan is is everyday low prices well if they’re 5 prices for everything spoiler alert for them are not alone. [1:03:02] Inside you know most retailers today like have these fragmented pricing models and I believe that trust is such a big deal moving forward and there’s so much information and transparency available as a result of digital in the web that I feel like it’s inevitable that all retailers are going to get forced. To adopt a much more transparent pricing model which generally means so much more Universal pricing model so you’re not going to get away with. Having a different price in the stores then you do online and hoping the customer just doesn’t catch you so in general will see more Universal pricing. But you probably at the same time will see that price change a lot more based on Real World Market circumstances and so you’ll see a lot more Dynamic pricing but it won’t be secret prices that are changing without you knowing it like I think retarded you know tend to be transparent about that and into me the best example today is is Amazon they have a super Dynamic pricing model that changes all the time but if you put something in your cart and the price goes down they don’t just take that extra margin they tell you. And they lower the price of the item in your cart and when you you don’t go to their stores they now have digital prices and all the store so they can show you the same price online that they have in the store so I you know it’s. [1:04:27] It’s very difficult for retailers to make changes like this and break down silos so we’re not going to see it happen overnight but I think we’re we’re already starting to see retail shift in that direction so to me the future is. Universal transparent Dynamic pricing. Scot: [1:04:42] All right most sybaritic had a whole bunch of questions I’m going to lightning around a couple of them when is spiffy coming to Seattle. Stay tuned Ken Scott please update is Amazon scape and how has it changed unfortunately there is an inverse correlation between my time to work on the Amazon scape and your first questions to come to Seattle so position where I don’t have a ton of time to work on that it’s changed a lot so I think Amazon’s probably launched. It’s been a year old I would say two programs a month 24 to 30 programs since I did that so like the Amazon Prime wardrobe isn’t on there 4-star store is not on there there’s a lot not on there one day delivery yes those are not on there. Jason: [1:05:39] Scot I have no cars in Seattle so between those two I’m going to vote for the Amazon scape. Scot: [1:05:44] Maybe maybe I’ll find an internship this one of our many interns can help with this this should be an interesting one is Amazon going to do to Walgreens drug stores what they did to the bookstore with the axis of pill pack and private label enable the ability to sell Massey pg-propyl probably you think there’s one for the drug source. Jason: [1:06:11] I think it is I mean they’re going for everything so it is a market like that they made some Investments and they’ve already like I think had some material effects on valuations for the national companies. [1:06:25] I’m not sure like I mean there’s that Jeff has a equip that I kind of like and agree with Amazon denim put book stores out of business the internet put book stores out of business and I think the same made partly be true for retail pharmacies like I’m sure Amazon’s going to take a go after and take a chunk of the pharmacy business and that will be derogatory to traditional pharmacies but the bigger deal is we’re shifting from picking up prescriptions in store to having prescriptions delivered to our home so increasingly the old wanting majority of all the prescriptions we take R tronic, Africana conditions and returning things and the insurance companies are basically mandating that we all get shipped these bigger quantities of those prescriptions at home so as a smaller percentage of prescriptions get picked up in-store there’s less traffic in those doors the only reason people go to the stores his prescriptions they’re not good retailers if they don’t have prescriptions and so like I feel like that friends that macro-trends. Is really going to dramatically affect the retail pharmacy space now most of the retail pharmacies have already pivoted they own insurance companies and mail-order prescription services so that seems like where they’re putting their big bats well I’m sure Amazon will have some success in Pharmacy in and probably some Innovative products. [1:07:55] I’m not sure that’s why I’m wearing they’re going to capture. Huge market share super fast because there is a bunch of Regulation and Power in the hands of individual insurance companies that that you know are some institutional impediments that make it a harder Market to dominate them say books was not saying they won’t get there but it would take long. Scot: [1:08:19] Yep Mike my take on that is when I go to a drugstore I stand in line and there’s usually. More helpers than customers but there’s only one person to check out the person five people in front of me has a thousand questions and it takes me an hour to get something but she took me 5 minutes so I feel like there’s a huge customer service kind of customer experience got there that the Amazon could definitely fill in in his going to go at it because it’s very clearly something that they can make a huge Improvement. This is a good one Jason how we doing on time. Jason: [1:09:02] I think we are coming up to the end. Scot: [1:09:06] Listen to all your questions about sitting on a big one can you talk about the advertising race to grab the wallet we seen some big news lately Target in talks to buy Triad Walmart Spring advertising and house and made a key hire there where is ever

As regulators at the Federal Aviation Administration reviewed designs for Boeing's newest passenger jet, they paid extra attention to several features, including the lithium batteries, the pressure fueling system and the inflatable safety slides. One feature that did not receive exceptional scrutiny: a new software system intended to prevent stalls, which we now know as the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS). That same software is suspected of playing a role in two deadly crashes involving the same jet, the Boeing 737 Max 8. Authorities around the world are now taking a closer look at the jet's approval by the FAA, a process that relies heavily on Boeing employees to certify the safety of the plane. Also, new information has emerged about the crash on October 29 of a Lion Air Boeing 737 Max 8 jet in Indonesia that suggests the flight crew was ill-prepared to deal with a problematic new MCAS. Data from the other so-called black box, the cockpit voice recorder, suggests the flight crew didn't even understand what they were fighting and may have had no idea how to override the malfunctioning system. It is reported that the pilots could be heard frantically scouring a quick reference guide to figure out why the nearly-new jet was repeatedly going into a dive. The recording apparently includes audio of the pilots speculating about a problem with the plane's airspeed controls, not the MCAS. Separately, Bloomberg reported Tuesday that the same Lion Air plane that crashed on October 29 may have narrowly avoided a crash the previous day, thanks to a pilot hitching a ride in the cockpit who correctly diagnosed the problem and told the flight crew how to fix it. What's wrong with the FAA process? So, Wednesday morning, just after midnight on the East Coast, the Walt Disney Company closed its $71.3 billion acquisition of 21st Century Fox assets. It is now an entertainment colossus the size of which the world has never seen. The New York Times writes, "The ripple effects may not become clear for years. Analysts say that Disney could force smaller studios to merge as they scramble to compete. It will have greater leverage over theater owners when it comes to box office splits. And Disney's plans to use Fox content to forcefully move into streaming could slow the growth of Netflix." In terms of the dangers posed by conglomerates and monopolies, we go back to 1911, when the Supreme Court of the United States ruled, in Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v.s. The United States, that Standard Oil of New Jersey must be dissolved under the Sherman Antitrust Act and split into 34 companies. Then we had the breakup of AT&T. There seems to be this cyclical process of break-ups and re-consolidation. As consumers of entertainment and media, should the public be concerned?GUESTS;Anonymous Guest — Qualified pilot on a number of Boeing 737 airliners, as well as Boeing's 777, 757 and 727 and Lockheed's L1011. He has logged around 100 hours on the Boeing 900 Max; around 10,000 hours in the 737; and nearly 25,000 hours total flying time. Kim Keenan — Executive vice president of marketing and research at Odyssey Media, co-chair of the Internet Innovation Alliance and senior adjunct professor at George Washington University Law School.

Curt and Katie talk about antitrust laws – how they impact therapists, how to avoid concerns, and what to pay attention to when you’re a therapist.     It’s time to reimagine therapy and what it means to be a therapist. To support you as a whole person and a therapist, your hosts, Curt Widhalm and Katie Vernoy talk about how to approach the role of therapist in the modern age. In this episode we talk about: Sherman Antitrust Law Why antitrust laws are important Looking at insurance companies and the discrepancy that therapists are more held to antitrust than insurance companies for complicated reasons Therapy practices are businesses and in competition with each other Price Fixing and Market Share agreements The problem and risk with group boycotts The difference between colluding and discussing publicly available information How competition discussing fees in small Facebook groups can lead to price fixing The Cardigan Cartel How to communicate fees and discuss insurance issues without getting into antitrust issues Individuals on insurance panels are still competitors How Antitrust can be anti-consumer What the risks are for discussing pros and cons of different insurance panels How to avoid anti-trust problems Why you should talk to an attorney if you’re concerned How interstate commerce relates to antitrust and how Insurance Plans can play a game to get out of all of this The differences between employees who can strike and separate businesses banding together How Single-Payer relates to this topic How associations play into this and why they can survey their members on fees and other aspects of their businesses The difference between being responsible as a business owner and following the trends Sharing information, without making decisions and planning together How often therapists or other healthcare providers get in trouble for antitrust concerns, as well as related licenses Publicly available information is safe to discuss Share information, but don’t put a call to action to do something with your colleagues     Our Generous Sponsor: Thanks again to our sponsor, Ben Caldwell Labs! Ben Caldwell Labs offers MFTs a fully-online prep program for the California MFT Law and Ethics Exam that can have you ready for your test in as little as seven days. His program is clear, useful, and best of all, less than half the cost of competing programs. And if you purchase by March 31st, 2019 and use code MODERN at checkout, you'll get it at an even better price. Visit BenCaldwellLabs.com/California for complete details.   Relevant Episodes: In-Person Networking Modern Therapists Strike Back Resources mentioned: We’ve pulled together resources mentioned in this episode and put together some handy-dandy links. Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 CAMFT Article: Avoiding Antitrust Problems McCarren Ferguson Act Therapist Staffing Company and Two Owners Settle Charges that They Colluded on Rates Paid to Physical Therapists in Dallas/Fort Worth Area How Does Antitrust Apply to Psychologists? From APA CPH Insurance Antitrust Information Spotlight on Trade Organizations Association-Sponsored Market Research Program: Common pitfalls, antitrust risks, and opportunities What the Antitrust Exemption for Health Insurers Means California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists   Therapists in Private Practice Our Facebook Group – The Modern Therapists Group Therapy Reimagined 2019: Sign up here to get notified when the details are released. Our CALL FOR SPEAKERS!!   Our consultation services: The Fifty-Minute Hour   Who we are: Curt Widhalm is a Licensed Marriage & Family Therapist in private practice in the Los Angeles area. He is a Board Member at Large for the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists, a Subject Matter Expert for the California Board of Behavioral Sciences, Adjunct Faculty at Pepperdine University, and a loving husband and father. He is 1/2 great person, 1/2 provocateur, and 1/2 geek, in that order. He dabbles in the dark art of making "dad jokes" and usually has a half-empty cup of coffee somewhere nearby. Learn more at: www.curtwidhalm.com Katie Vernoy is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist, coach, and consultant. As a helping professional for two decades, she’s navigated the ups and downs of our unique line of work. She’s run her own solo therapy practice, designed innovative clinical programs, built and managed large, thriving teams of service providers, and consulted hundreds of helping professionals on how to build meaningful AND sustainable practices. In her spare time, Katie is secretly siphoning off Curt's youthful energy, so that she can take over the world. Learn more at: www.katievernoy.com A Quick Note: Our opinions are our own. We are only speaking for ourselves – except when we speak for each other, or over each other. We’re working on it. Our guests are also only speaking for themselves and have their own opinions. We aren’t trying to take their voice, and no one speaks for us either. Mostly because they don’t want to, but hey.   Stay in Touch: www.mtsgpodcast.com www.therapyreimagined.com Our Facebook Group – The Modern Therapist’s Group https://www.facebook.com/therapyreimagined/ https://twitter.com/therapymovement https://www.instagram.com/therapyreimagined/   Credits: Voice Over by DW McCann https://www.facebook.com/McCannDW/ Music by Crystal Grooms Mangano http://www.crystalmangano.com/

The battle between the NFL and the USFL finally comes to a head. Donald Trump has bullied his way to the top of the USFL and pressured his league into suing the NFL for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act.But the NFL Commissioner Pete Rozelle is not about to back down. If the NFL settles now, they’ll be opening the floodgates to a slew of new competitors, and costly trials the league can’t afford. The only course of action? Dismantle the USFL so completely that no one even thinks to challenge the NFL again. Support us by supporting our sponsors!

Hi Guys and welcome to Finance and Fury the Furious Friday edition. This is part 7, the last episode of the miniseries about all things politics. Sorry it took a while to cover, I wanted to do this topic justice and explain all the steps and outcomes instead of jumping to conclusions. We have covered a lot, there are many bits of the puzzle. Who, what, how, why, and potential outcomes – We have been through the Fabians, the political spectrum and democracy, then how a population is organised (Rules For Radicals), the fair go, then political progress for equality, then how the west got to be in such a good position, and how we may lose it. If you made it all the way through, awesome work. Thanks for listening to me rant on this Final part: What should the government be involved in? What services should they be involved in? To start: Have a quick real-world example to look at US Government Shutdown: It’s been almost a month, shutdown since 22/12/18. It’s the longest in US history, everyone has called it a crisis Over border funding: $5.7bn for a wall, already compromised to make it steel rather than concrete As a comparison: US gave Israel $25bn to help build their wall Total Government spending (the Fed, States, Etc) is $7.56trn: this is $20.7bn spending a day The Wall is a 0.07% cost to the budget for the year Enter the blame game: Irony is Schumer and Pelosi were in favour of a wall: Until Trump came along. Showing it was mainly just talk More political infighting: First time I have seen Democrats oppose spending more of someone else’s money Question: is the US still spinning? Is life going on? The longer that the shutdown occurs, the more people in the US are waking up to how little they need it But not for the Government workers and the IRS (their tax department) Workers aren’t being paid, but they will be. They will get back pay, for the time of the shutdown whilst they were not working. Is that a good deal? But private citizens are stepping in, picking up trash in parks and helping where they can Truth is that the Government has little to do with lives directly, unless It is paying you, it is taxing/regulating you, or it is arresting you Indirectly though, unfortunately, it affects all of our lives Leads to the last part: What should the Government be involved with, or provide for a country? This differs for where you sit on the political spectrum. It’s no secret which side I sit on, I value individual freedom and empowerment rather than the group thinking that everyone should have equal outcome For this episode, I will try and put my bias aside. The measurement for this episode is: has there been a net positive benefit or loss to a country based on Government Intervention? Progress from betterments to our lives, more freedoms, better health, etc or does it detract? Excluded "moral hazards", not saving money because of the knowledge that the State will provide an age pension and subsidised housing, and over-use of "free" health services in the absence of price signals to consumers. All of which isn’t really free Won’t have time to do this topic justice in 30 minutes. I will give the 1,000-foot view. If you are interested in a deeper dive, let me know If I don’t explain something fully, or you disagree, let me know as well!   What the Government is good at: Net positives Funding: Science and R&D. For the past 100 years, most advancement is in fields with the most money and manpower Technology and science: Government Funding has been great. Advancements over 100 years have been from this, like medicine, the internet etc Technological advancements in weaponry and nuclear science during the WWII. Government Funded Rocketry and telecommunications during the Space Race. This was all Government Funded Concentrating a large number of engineers and scientists to work together on the same project will, almost every time, produce more net advancement compared to if every member worked alone. DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Funded things like the Internet, Google and Google maps, Windows, WWW, video conferencing, Siri, GPS, Facebook This is good: there is a measurable benefit, which the population adopted. Through being a demonstrable fact Most major developments come when the government diverts large budgets to achieve progress (rockets and planes). A vast difference in plane technology from WW1 to WW2. Major boost to development, with the failing of technology progress through history, boils down to individuals with no money or ability to share it Okay for measurable technology, like integrated circuits, they’re very competitive. If your circuits are faster and cheaper it can boost profits for your company. Other forms of technological progress. Less quantifiable as potential improvements, the outcomes are unknown If they not seen as profitable less funding from the private sector is likely If research and development are financed by investors, they want to see as high returns as possible But this is only part of the story. The acceleration of technological progress suspiciously correlates with the population growth A higher population creates a higher net number of scientists /engineers, who can provide more research/work China was advanced until the 1400s. There was a trial by error: high populations, then the EU took over with trial by experiment The issue: The Government mandated and Government ran research. Government bodies paid to research problems will always find a problem. What happens if there is no problem? No money, so then there is no social platform to run on As long as the Government doesn’t take over tech or directing the research, but acts as an investor, this could even make money. Just like universities. It’s a double-edged sword: The faster things change, the more creative destruction. This is not a bad thing. For example in the past with farming, too much at once is bad and it creates unrest. The Government doesn’t like it, and the population gets unhappy with them. Other research: $850,784 for a study of Italy’s Catherine de Medici, a noblewoman who became queen consort of King Henry II (King of France) 1519-1559. Is this needed?   National Protection and services: All good Police and Firefighters: Emergency services workers all help the population. They protect and keep us safe, and enforce the rule of law.   On the Fence: Positive and negatives preface Education and health are perfectly fine But not perfect with funding models: there are no incentives to minimise costs, it’s the opposite. If you don’t use all of your budget, you won’t get more to use next year  Infrastructure: On the fence, It is needed but at what cost? East West link in Melbourne: Estimated $800-900m has been spent on a road to never be built NBN: has cost at least $50bn to date and simply a huge high-risk mistake, no private company would ever have built it. (Rudd) The government ignored improvements in wireless technology and continuing moves away from landline. NBN will face stiff competition from 5G mobile technology and sold at a huge loss. Valuation only at $10bn Health: National Health is declining even though we are more advanced than ever Cost blowouts: Royal Adelaide Hospital is the 3rd most expensive building in the world (per square foot) it has 600 beds and cost $2.5bn Still teaching the food triangle that depicts that carbs are great, but stay away from healthy fats and proteins Where do most of the world’s advancements in medical technology and medication come from? The USA. If Americans didn’t have a profit system, we would not have most of the meds or medical tech we do Education: Is great. But, where have you learnt more? At school or on the job? If still at school, it’s hard to answer I am no expert, I need to learn more. I have got a few books by John Gatto and others to finish What I do know so far? Government Education is a new concept in past 100 years, it’s modelled around factory workers Education levels are higher now, looking at literacy rates. Was it government policy, or a changing world? When the Government took over in the early 1900s, the population needed to work, not go to school (Farmers, etc). it forced education they didn’t need, there was low attendance. Today there is a higher % of population in non-trade/construction/manufacturing positions All schools private: More competition, lower fees all around. 35% are independent/ catholic currently But wouldn’t work: not really private, Australia has no-profit schools (private higher education does, there are 170 of them) Australian Average Education is $20-30k for independent schools. One of the highest education costs in the world What might help: Education (Self Education focused on the individual around needs) I went to school in Austria for a while. The system is set up more for the kids’ interests There are nine years of education. Then there are a series of vocational-technical and university tracks to follow University, gymnasium, and Trades like the Polytechnische Schule Putting everyone through the same meat grinder ends up leaving everyone behind, becoming a learned helplessness What it hurts Economic: The quest for equality, where most research funded from the government or special interest groups show the need for government intervention with this In the early-20th century: the view that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality  The cause was minimally regulated laissez-fairecapitalism with monopolistic corporations; Often violent conflict between workers and capitalists would erupt due to the claim, so it needed to be addressed Sherman Antitrust Act: made it illegal for anti-competitive practices (monopolies, cartels, predatory pricing) in the 1890s This was helpful and helped improve competition and remove monopolies But is it obsolete? 60-80% of advertisements through Facebook and Google. Twitter and their competitor Gab just gets shut down 21st Century: Legislation to redistribute, which is not so good. Tax people to pay for things for others, in other words, Social Democracy Welfare state: Reliance on government also increases what revenues governments need Tax: Mandatory financial charge imposed on the taxpayer by the Government From 1915 to 1942 Income taxes were introduced. A relatively new concept in society as previous taxes were on wealth and land ownership Rome had a 1-3% tax on value of wealth owned for citizens, in times of war you got a vote if you paid tax Progress: Everyone gets a vote and can vote for more redistributions, changes voting a bit Equality through social organisation. A change of policy to affect the population, where we get political activism Question: Is it better to let people choose to adopt something or are they forced to? Legislate for compelled compliance in society, introduce laws to control society. Make it the way progressives want Governmental power of the population is increased when some of the population want it Issues: Speech (limits freedom) with racism and ‘speech laws’, or ‘hate speech’ who defines hate? Already illegal to incite violence through speech, telling people to hurt someone Sonja Kruger was taken to court for blasphemy for her comments 2 years ago about a ‘Muslim ban’ in the US Only from nations with links to Terrorism, not Indonesia (1# for Muslims), or Egypt (1# for Arab) Claimant took her to human rights tribunal, she pays costs upfront and taxpayers pay for claimant The individual is the extreme minority. If you don’t protect the individual’s rights you are failing at protecting minorities. Islamophobia or homophobia is incorrect terminology as a phobia is an irrational fear Rewriting history to suit a narrative, Australian History lesson: Labor party was the one who implemented the White Australia Policy, the ALP wanted more direct methods of exclusion than the dictation test Menzies and Holt (two Liberal Conservatives) were the ones to start dismantling it. Interesting how perception changes Environment: Is the improvement in cleanliness from Government Regulations, or from improving technology? Nobody wants to see pollution or to ruin the earth. But for all the taxes on climate change, what benefit is there? Water: Green/ALP opposition to building new water storages. State governments tried to reduce demand by increasing prices (also generating revenue). Haven’t had a dam built for a capital city since Melbourne’s Thomson Dam in 1984 Drought reappeared from 2003 to 2010. There is little scope for further water savings State governments panicked and rather than build dam, they started spending on desalination plants (massively more expensive to build and operate than storage dams that can fill at virtually no cost). Melbourne plant cost $4 billion, Sydney cost $1.803 billion, Gold Coast cost $1.2 billion, and Adelaide plant cost $2.2 billion Sydney plant's costs are more than $500,000 a day, and it has not supplied any water since 2012 Desalination also uses enormous amounts of electricity and (despite not being used) is responsible for adding $100 to $200 annually to household water bills. Electricity: Destroying electricity system, replacing cheap and reliable coal-based generators with wind and solar power. Electricity costs are double those of US and Canada. Power prices have increased 60+% in the last ten years Huge subsidies for renewables and a failure of regulation are the main causes. Subsidies paid to producers of renewable electricity are $3 billion per year, yet power is more expensive Coal and nuclear are the two cheapest sources of base load power Carbon emissions by the rest of the world. Our efforts to reduce "greenhouse" emissions won't work We make up about 1% of global emissions, which is high for our population Australia's shunning of coal or nuclear energy is the equivalent to Saudi Arabia banning the domestic use of its oil. While wanting to regulate prices, we can’t have both (low prices with low supply) Side note: immigration 3rd to 1st world, individuals use 20 times the emissions they did previously. Logically, for lower emissions, against immigration automatically as it increases emissions being produced. How far do we go? Currently, people want the Government to have large involvement in ‘combating climate change’ Religious fervour about it, like modern blasphemy Again, nobody wants to live in a toxic environment (pollution). But, everything is relative. The US in 2009 gave $26.1bn to climate change, $641m was climate science You are a scientist, it is easy funding and good pay. But have to prove that the problem is there, just like before if there is no problem, then no money School kids and protesters demanding the Government drop emissions We are the ones that emit, but they need a parental figure to walk in a fix the problem for them Introducing stresses in their brain which increases cortisol. A constant confusion, fear of climate can lead to long term negative impact on brain development To wrap up this series: A lot of what the Government does can be handled by the private sector If private companies or employees don’t perform, they get replaced. The Government never replaces itself What you can do: Talk about politics (only if you are interested). There is a stigma in society about talking about politics, why? Best way to have population avoid it altogether if it is never spoken about, and then no need to pay attention and removes the possibility of people discussing ideas Same with money, it's impolite to talk about money? Why? Opening facts into the public conversation, it makes people think for themselves, not just repeat false rhetoric Most people know more about what is happening in their favourite tv shows than in politics. The tv show has very little impact on your life compared to current political events. Opens a debate about the issue, rather than silencing one group, everyone should be heard Don’t be afraid to speak your mind, learn as much as you can for what is relevant Make your own path in life and be less reliant on external forces. This is what gives you individual liberty Which is at the heart of financial freedom!   If you made it through, thank you very much for listening to this series. I hope it wasn’t boring and was actually interesting. If you have any questions or want me to explore one of these topics further, you can let me know on the contact page here.  

Here are the Key Terms, People, and Events for each topic covered in the podcast: Party Politics - Stalwarts, Half-Breeds, patronage, James Garfield, Pendleton Act, Election of 1888 Farmers - Grangers, Farmer's Alliances, Mary Elizabeth Lease, Populist Party, Free silver Government Regulation - Interstate Commerce Act, Sherman Antitrust Act, Coxey's Army, Currency Act

September 5th: Mr. Jones Goes to Washington - Alex Jones storms the Washington D.C. swamp to hold the establishment media and Big Tech accountable by facing his accusers who collude to deplatform and unperson him. Catch Alex ring the alarm over Google and Apple using Communist Chinese tactics to censor political dissidents. The Infowars message to President Trump is to use Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act to enforce the First Amendment and stop Big Tech’s criminal collusion of violating the civil rights of Americans. Do not miss once-in-a-lifetime press conferences where Alex calls a member of the press “dumber than a box of rocks.” Call and tune in now!

K.J. Bagchi: The Obstacle is the Myth (Ep. 149) K.J. Bagchi joined Joe Miller to discuss how the Model Minority Myth negatively impacts Asian Americans and impedes an inclusive policy dialogue. Bio K.J. Bagchi (@kjbagchi) is the Senior Staff Attorney for Telecommunications, Technology, and Media at Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC. K.J. has broad experience providing counsel and policy advice for elected members at the local, state and federal levels. He worked as Legislative Counsel at the D.C. City Council and for former Congressman Mike Honda. He has drafted legislation in a variety of areas including juvenile justice, immigration, and consumer protection. Through various roles, K.J. has developed programs, trainings, and conversations to embolden and empower the AAPI community in civic participation. K.J. holds a bachelor’s degree from University of California Davis and a law degree from Seattle University School of Law. He is admitted to practice in the State of Maryland. Resources Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC 14: Stories that Inspired Satyajit Ray by Bhaskar Chattopadhyay News Roundup Facebook reveals new disinformation campaign Facebook revealed a new disinformation campaign last week which led to its removal of 32 pages and accounts on Facebook and Instagram. Facebook wrote that the accounts were engaged in “inauthentic behavior”. The company said that it was unable to attribute the campaign to Russia. But Virginia Senator Mark Warner said this provides what he termed as “further evidence” that the Kremlin is attempting to impact the midterm elections. Facebook is set to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee on September 5th. Facebook teams up with banks to share customer data The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Facebook has sought detailed banking information from the likes of JP MorganChase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and US Bancorp. Facebook wants users to be able to communicate with their banks within Messenger. In a press release, Facebook pushed back writing that the Wall Street Journal report is overblown as it is seeking no more information than other technology firms such as Google and Amazon. But this new revelation is sure to come up during the September 5th hearing on the Hill. States sue to stop 3D printing of guns AP reports that several states are suing the Trump Administration for settling with a purveyor of plans to make homemade 3D printed guns. A federal judge had blocked Defense Distributed from releasing plans that would allow anyone with a 3D printer to print the plastic firearms. But the Trump Administration stepped in and negotiated a settlement. Nineteen states including the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit. And there’s newly introduced legislation in the House that would either prevent the 3-D printing of guns, or make 3D-printed guns detectable at security checkpoints. Advertisers sue Sinclair Sinclair Broadcasting’s troubles got worse last week after advertisers brought a class action lawsuit against it, Tribune Media, and several co-defendants for coordinating to inflate ad prices in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Department of Justice is currently probing the possibility that Sinclair worked with competitors to manipulate prices, after it discovered suspicious behavior during the course of its review of Sinclair’s $3.9 billion acquisition of Tribune. The FCC has since sent the merger to an Administrative Law Judge to decide, an act that experts largely see as the death knell for the merger. Lobbying disclosure statements show that the FCC’s decision has led Sinclair to retain more lobbyists than it has since the year 2000. They’re working with the S-3 Group—a Republican lobbying firm -- according to the Hill. Apple hits a $1 trillion market valuation Apple closed with a $1 trillion market cap on Thursday, making it the first firm to do so.  Notably, the company has hung on to that valuation, with a market cap of over $1 trillion for the August 6th close. Facebook, Apple, YouTube, and Spotify remove all Alex Jones’ Content Facebook, Apple, YouTube, and Spotify have removed all of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ channels for failing to meet community guidelines against hate speech and glorifying violence. The conservative commentator founded InfoWars in 1999 and is largely seen as having been instrumental to the election of President Donald Trump. The net neutrality fight is the gift that keeps on giving The net neutrality fight is the gift that keeps on giving. First, the FCC’s own Inspector General has found that the FCC lied back in May of 2017 when it said a wave of comments following John Oliver’s net neutrality segment on Last Week Tonight led to a large-scale Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack. I repeat: the attack . never. happened.  As Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel noted—they were actual comments. The inspector general’s findings haven’t been released, but FCC Chairman Ajit Pai tried to get out in front of it by making the announcement on Monday and blaming the former CIO for saying it was a DDoS attack—which he never did. Also, the FCC and DOJ have filed a petition with the Supreme Court to vacate the DC Court of Appeals ruling to uphold the 2015 net neutrality rules. The FCC’s repeal of those rules wasn’t enough I suppose.