payday loans

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Tax writers in house reviewing the sacred cow?

Even though both Republican and Democrats agree that simplifying the tax structure is imminent, they are both hedging on rolling back the deduction for home mortgage interest.  It’s become a sort of sacred cow.

Ways and Means committee members see the deduction as a lifeline for those in the middle class and essential to help new home buyers achieve their dreams of ownership.

The mortgage deduction is not only popular but also expensive to maintain, however, lawmakers on both sides are reluctant to make radical changes to it. Considering the housing crisis, Dave Camp (R-Mich) of the Ways and Means committee mentioned “Real estate taxes require careful and thoughtful review and although the tax code is 10 times larger than the Bible, not all the code is bad.”  The mortgage interest deduction has not been overhauled since 1986.

The tax break, according the JCT, will cost an estimated $364 billion between 2012-2016.  Other expensive deductions, such as employer-sponsored health insurance, and the deduction for state and local income taxes do not see signs of being touched as well.

Camp wants to see an extensive review of the tax code with a target of reducing the top individual and corporate rate to 25 percent.  Democrats are not buying it, saying it will shift the tax burden to the middle class.  Camp is saying that the offsets needed to lower taxes don’t have to come from eliminating tax breaks but can come from other areas in the 1986 bill.

Both parties say that the majority of benefits (2 thirds in 2012) from the mortgage interest deduction go to households making less than $200,000.  Only 14% came from households making over $200,000.

The goal, according to Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass) of the Ways and Means committee, is to get people into home ownership. Rep Tim Griffin (R-Ark) says that “at its core, this benefits middle-class, working Americans.”

Gary Thomas, president of the National Association of Realtors, doesn’t agree that the deduction should cover second homes and that the amount of mortgage covered should be trimmed from $1 million to $500,000.

Eric Todar, a scholar from the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center is skeptical and believes that the deduction mostly allows those who don’t need a subsidy to buy a bigger home.

Only a quarter of the deduction benefits went to households making less than $100,000 in 2012, according the JCT and it’s only available to about 1/3 of households that itemize.

Mark Calabria of the Libertarian Cato Institute argues that the deduction gives consumers another opportunity to incur debt and that tax provisions that encourage home ownership should instead, incentivize home equity.  Rather than be tied to a large mortgage, it’s more important own a home outright.

Original Article

 

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Republicans Work Toward a Tax Reform Budget and Away From Entitlements

Republicans in the House have begun to cut back on their desire to incur hard cuts to retirement programs and are now focusing more on simplifying the tax code which is a more popular topic for taxpayers.  They still want to cut spending for Social Security and Medicare but have launched a series of meetings to make tax reform a top priority.

Just weeks ago, President Obama offered to reduce Social Security cost of living adjustments, and raise Medicare premiums in an effort to work with Republicans.  This ended up angering seniors and some Republicans as well who feel the move was political suicide.

However, all parties agree with simplifying the tax code and feel the time is right.  The Ways and Means committee has done surveys and polls that show that taxpayers are getting tired of the current, complicated tax structure and want simpler and fairer laws.  Dave Camp (R-Mich) would like to see it streamlined to just two brackets and a top rate of 25 percent.

This strategy is also echoed in the Senate where Republicans feel that it offers a more reasonable alternative to negotiating directly with the President.  Senators are being pressured to come up with their own debt reduction plan to circumvent Obama’s proposal to reduce borrowing by $1.8 billion over the next 10 years by implementing higher taxes and cuts to retirement programs.

Camp and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew’s aides have begun discussions about tax reforms.  Democrats are not taking this seriously and say it’s a fantasy that legislation will be finished before the next elections in 2014 much less than September when lawmakers must pass legislation to raise the debt limit or risk national default.

Democrats also argue that tax reform doesn’t meet the requirements Republicans have set for supporting an increase in the debt limit.  Even though House Speaker John A Boehner (R-Ohio) says he will demand “cuts and reforms” to balance the budget, the vision of the GOP regarding tax reform is “neutral revenue.”  This means all cash raised from reducing tax breaks would be returned to taxpayers in lower rates with no money left to reduce annual budget deficits.

“A simpler tax code will spur economic activity, create jobs, increase wages and thus, raise revenue offering ‘one way out of our debt’” says Camp.

Almost 30 Republican lawmakers attended the first meeting about tax reform with more sessions planned.

The White House is saying it will not negotiate over the debt limit.  It feels that Republicans have been given a common sense budget offer and now the ball is in their court. The debt limit is not negotiable because it has come from bills the Congress has “racked up.”

The House is still not clear on how it will be accomplished.  Republicans and Democrats will be required to resolve their long standing bickering over whether tax reform will generate new tax revenue to reduce the deficit or if it will lower taxes.  The compromise would be tax reform and finding common ground to cut taxes for American families as well as help businesses create jobs and reduce the deficit.

Original Article

 

Monday, May 6, 2013

Tax Reform Coming Soon and What it Means for You

Taxpayers and accountants have been fighting to bring about tax reform for years and finally the House and Senate are offering alternatives to streamline and simplify them.

Rep Dave Camp from Michigan who is chair of the Ways and Means Committee issued a news release in February suggesting changes in the complicated set of rules that our tax system currently has.  The Senate finance committee issued 3 papers this year regarding tax reform alternatives.  Even though both the Senate and House proposals are different, the common theme is simplifying the process and making it more business friendly.

Although reform changes cannot take place immediately, they will include individual, corporate, partnership and international taxation.  Lawmakers must balance managing governmental revenue as well as simplifying the process for taxpayers and tax professionals.

An example of reform proposals would affect corporate taxpayers.  Filing deadlines would be altered, increased expensing of qualifying assets would be permanent, the limitation on the use of the cash method of accounting would be increased, and startup and organizational costs would be consolidated into a single provision.

President Obama released his proposed budget for 2014 in April which includes tax reform measures. Some of the House and Senate proposals are not included in this plan.  However, whatever the outcome, both the President, House, and Senate all agree that simplification and making it easier for taxpayers to comply is the goal.

Original Article

 

Saturday, April 27, 2013

Obama’s Proposed Budget for 2014 adding New Estate Tax Provisions

The President recently released his proposals for the 2014 budget.  To read the entire proposal click here.  These proposals include several that will affect estate, gift and generation-skipping. (GST)  One would return the estate, gift and GST tax regimes to the 2009 rules.  What this means, is that there will be a 45% top tax rate, and a $3.5 million exemption for estate and GST tax and a $1 exemption for gift taxes.  Neither will be indexed for inflation.

You may recall that the law that passed in late 2012 made changes to estate and gift taxes “permanent.” Hmm, my idea of permanent is a little longer than 120 days.

A new proposal states that GST tax exclusion does not apply to certain distributions made from health and education trusts used for medical care and education.

Other facets of the proposed budget include:

Consistency would be required in value for income tax purposes and transfer.

Coordination of grantor trusts for certain income and tax rules may alter estate planning methods and could transfer tax benefits of sales to grantor trusts that are defective.

A minimum 10 year term for grantor retained annuity trusts will be required and 10 years will be added to life expectancy of the annuitant.

The duration of a GST exemption will be limited to 90 years.

The lien on estate tax deferrals will be extended to up to 15 years and 3 months from the time of death.

Original Article

 

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

The second coming of Facebook – Apr. 11, 2013

ZUC29 mark zuckerberg
(Fortune)

Back in 2010 Mark Zuckerberg made a very bad decision. Instead of building separate apps for iPhones, Androids, BlackBerrys, Nokia devices, and, yes, even Microsoft phones, he put his engineers to work designing a version of Facebook that could operate on any smartphone. In effect, he was betting that as different operating systems jostled for control of mobile devices, standalone apps would go away and soon we would surf websites on our phones, just as we do on PCs.

Zuckerberg was wrong. Google’s Android and Apple’s iOS quickly became the dominant mobile operating systems, and Facebook’s applications, which were built with its CEO’s web-centric worldview in mind, didn’t work well on either platform. They were buggy and slow, crashing often. A 2011 update garnered 19,000 one-star reviews in the Apple App Store within the first month. “It’s probably one of the biggest mistakes we’ve ever made,” Zuckerberg tells me during an interview at Facebook’s Menlo Park, Calif., headquarters in late March.

Just six years after it had been founded, Facebook (FB) — the company that had ushered in the social-networking era — was missing the next big shift in technology. Around the world consumers were abandoning laptops for mobile devices, busying themselves with a dizzying array of downloaded apps designed specifically for small touchscreens and people on the go. (Have you ever seen anyone play Angry Birds on a desktop?) Facebook, meanwhile, had only one engineer dedicated to the iPhone; most of its mobile team was coding for mobile web browsers.

Hidden among all the Silicon Valley success stories there are hundreds more companies that fail to catch the next wave and die. Zuckerberg was determined not to be among them. But to address his mobile problem, the wunderkind who had tasted enormous success so early in his career had to come to terms with failure, and he had to make sweeping structural and cultural changes at the young company — moves that often went against his instincts. Instead of going faster (virtually a religion at Facebook), mobile developers had to take a pause on new releases. Instead of doubling down on the mobile web, they had to embrace apps. And instead of trying to reach the broadest possible audience with a killer product, Facebook ultimately would have to pick one operating system to show off what it could really do in mobile. “I can’t overstate how much we had to retool the whole company’s development processes,” he says.

MORE: Facebook Home pre-release leaks

In early April, Zuckerberg introduced Facebook Home, a new way to provide its customers with a rich Facebook experience on mobile phones. As part of its newfound zeal for apps, the company had already successfully revamped its software for the iPhone and Android-powered devices. Facebook Home is far more ambitious; its software basically coopts certain Android devices so that Facebook’s signature elements — status updates, newsfeeds, chat — are the first things users see on the screen, even before they unlock their devices. Zuckerberg is essentially betting that really great coding will trump Facebook’s need to develop its own device or mobile platform.

The risks are huge. Facebook Home makes Zuckerberg dependent on Android, which is owned by one of Facebook’s biggest rivals, Google (GOOG, Fortune 500). He simultaneously risks alienating Apple (AAPL, Fortune 500), another key partner, by focusing resources on the iPhone maker’s major competitor. It also prevents him from reaping the potential benefits (mostly in quality and user experience) that could come from developing and controlling his own operating system. But if consumers and advertisers embrace the product, Zuckerberg will have a chance to prove that he knows how to reinvent the mobile experience — and in the process he will reinvent Facebook as we know it.

On a Friday after noon in October 2011, Cory Ondrejka (on-DRAY-ka) pulled his boss aside. Zuckerberg had just finished the weekly company Q&A, and he ducked into a conference room along with Facebook’s chief technology officer, Mike Schroepfer, known to everyone as Schrep. Ondrejka put it straight to Zuck: “Look, we need to throw away the [Apple] iOS app,” he remembers saying. “We need to go rebuild it.”

It was a bold recommendation, but Zuckerberg had been looking for bold when he and Schroepfer put Ondrejka in charge of mobile engineering. A gray-haired graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy (his degree is in weapons and systems engineering), Ondrejka pairs serious tech chops with experience founding companies. (Says Ondrejka: “The Facebook norm is either you just graduated from Stanford or Harvard, or you graduated from Stanford or Harvard, then went to Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500), then to Google.”) He co-founded Linden Lab, home to the virtual world Second Life. He put in a brief stint in marketing at music label EMI and then started a tech company that Facebook purchased in 2010.

MORE: 17 of Apple’s favorite apps

Despite Ondrejka’s credibility, his scheme made Zuckerberg uncomfortable. Ondrejka wanted the company to lie low for a year while Facebook users complained and investors continued to decry the company’s mobile incompetence. And not just any year — this was the year that outside investors would make a very public bet on the company’s ability to succeed through an initial public offering. He was asking Zuckerberg to stop Facebook’s efforts to try to improve its lackluster app, and to turn all its resources toward readying a new one written in code for the Apple operating system. If it worked they’d start rewriting the Android app. Schroepfer and Zuckerberg peppered Ondrejka with questions. “Rewriting things usually fails,” Ondrejka remembers his boss saying. “Why would you think it would work?”

He was prepared for that question with data he had accumulated, Facebook-style. Under order to “fix mobile,” Schrep had already pulled together a group of product designers and engineers to explore “the paths that would get us to awesome” on mobile. The group considered concentrating harder on Facebook’s current strategy. Facebook’s iPhone and Android apps were hybrids: They packaged the nascent mobile-web language inside Apple- and Android-specific programming. The problem was that apps built explicitly for iOS and Android were much handsomer and cooler than Facebook’s hybrids. The group considered various other patches and jury-rigged approaches, but the path became obvious to all involved: Facebook had to rewrite the apps from scratch. What’s more, Ondrejka planned not to change anything about the apps’ design. He strongly believed that redesigning the look and feel of the apps would be a distraction from the more pressing need to improve speed and usability. In other words, Facebook users would continue to use their busted, crappy apps for nearly a year, and when the project was done, they’d have the exact same apps — only they would work. “I signed off on it,” Zuckerberg says, “but it wasn’t my instinct.”

What Zuckerberg did know was clear: Facebook’s first priority needed to be figuring out a wireless strategy. He was maniacal about it. In December 2011 he reorganized the company to embed mobile engineers in all product teams. In June 2012 he began Facebook’s annual all-hands meeting by explaining that the company’s most pressing priority was to become a mobile company. He told Facebook’s army of coders and salespeople and recruiters and designers that they could help by trading in their iPhones for Android devices.

MORE: 4 lessons for Apple in the Facebook phone

Then Zuckerberg began to walk the walk. He has no computer monitor on his desk, which is a table sandwiched between Schroepfer’s table and across from Ondrejka’s. There are no computers in his “aquarium,” the large conference room that is encased in glass on all four sides and sits in the center of campus and from which Zuckerberg does many of his product reviews. When designers and engineers file in to show off their products, his first question is nearly always, “What’s that look like on mobile?”

To get engineers to think more holistically about Facebook, Ondrejka and Schroepfer began integrating the mobile developers into product teams. At Facebook developers choose the projects they want to work on, and product groups compete to woo them. Managers sent out reports highlighting the product teams that were doing a good job. Pretty quickly teams realized that if they wanted to get praised in the weekly memo, they needed to start recruiting mobile developers.

Ondrejka and some colleagues also added discipline to the production cycle for mobile products. On the web making updates and rolling back mistakes is easy and fast, and as a result engineers were encouraged to take chances and move quickly. Mobile platforms work very differently. For one, Apple and Google, as operating system owners, vet changes to apps, which can take time. Consumers also need to remember to update their apps, and that can be an infrequent occurrence. If a developer makes a mistake, it takes a lot longer to fix. Rather than a few minutes, a Facebook user may live with that error for a few weeks.

As Facebook got smarter about developing for mobile, the demand for talented mobile engineers spiked. At first that was very hard on the organization — the company didn’t have the talent to even identify the people it needed. A couple of key acquisitions — a Dutch design firm called Sofa, and Push Pop Press, an e-book company founded by two ex-Apple iOS engineers — bolstered the mobile-development ranks. In the summer of 2012, Facebook began offering a mobile-skills training program. Engineers could sign up for a weeklong course in either iOS or Android. Many moved directly into the course after boot camp; others signed up when they were between projects. No one is an expert after a week, of course, but Schroepfer explained that the typically high-intellect trainees know “just enough to be dangerous.” The classes, which host from 12 to 23 engineers, are now held in Menlo Park, New York City, Seattle, and London. So far some 600 engineers have gone through the program. They then join product teams, where they put their new skills to work.

MORE: If Google is a rain maker, what is Apple?

The results paid off. In August 2012, Facebook released a new iPhone app that was reported to be twice as fast and garnered four- and five-star ratings in the App Store. It was a welcome piece of good news for executives, who had spent much of the summer dealing with the fallout from Facebook’s disastrous May initial public offering, in which technical glitches, allegations of selective disclosure, and hype collided, leaving individual shareholders stymied and disappointed. Facebook stock today trades at about $28, 10 bucks below its $38-a-share offering price. Zuckerberg demurs when I ask him how the IPO has changed Facebook. “We made this transition to being a public company, and at the same time we made this transition to being a mobile company,” he says, “and the transition to being a mobile company had probably 10 times the difference on the company that anything about being public had. The company has definitely changed in the last year, but I don’t think it’s because we are now public.”

For the Past few years rumors have circulated that Zuckerberg had designs on creating a Facebook phone. After all, the leading Internet juggernauts — Apple, Google, and Amazon (AMZN, Fortune 500)make devices. Zuckerberg considered the idea, but he couldn’t make a business case for it. Facebook had a billion users; if the company launched a device successfully, it might reach 30 million people — maybe. Says Zuckerberg: “We are not going to totally rotate our company to build something that is only going to help out 3% of our people” at best.

Still, Zuckerberg believes users want a deeper Facebook experience on their phones, and data suggest that is a safe bet. In the U.S. alone, Facebook users spend a fifth to a quarter of their phone time on the service. So Zuckerberg began to explore the potential for integrating more deeply with Apple and Android. Apple’s operating system is controlled tightly by the company. Long before Steve Jobs died, Zuckerberg had begun conversations aiming to deepen his company’s relationship with the phonemaker, and the current version of the app includes an integrated contact list, among other things. But there’s only so much that an outside developer can accomplish on the Apple platform. Zuckerberg therefore turned his attention to the Android platform, which has far deeper opportunities for customization. On Android everything is an app — even your SMS text notifications can be customized by creative software developers.

MORE: Aereo could bring down broadcast TV

Last fall Zuckerberg asked a small team of designers and engineers to figure out what else might be possible on the Android phone. “We wanted to start off trying to rethink some of those core things and say, How could these be better if, instead of the current system you have, they were people-centric in all the themes that Facebook stands for?” he says. By February the team had grown to 20 men and four women, who relocated to the “war room,” a small room with a glass garage door that opens out onto the Facebook courtyard. Zuckerberg joined the team formally for a two-hour block each Tuesday. But he also tended to show up a lot, usually right around dinner as the group was settling down for an evening of work.

The result is Facebook Home, which users could download from the Google Play Store as of April 12. To start, it will be available pre-installed on the HTC First. Users of a half-dozen Android devices can also download it. Within the next few months, as Facebook’s engineers tweak it, the app will work on many other Android phones.

Facebook Home has three components. The glossy cover feed is the first; users can scroll through the newsfeed and comment on or “like” posts from the home screen. With the second component, Chatheads, Zuckerberg has attempted to capture messaging by reorienting it around people. Whenever users receive a message either over Facebook or via text, it appears at the top of the screen next to a picture of the sender encased in a small bubble. Users can read and respond without leaving an app. The third component is the app launcher. It takes users to a familiar-looking grid of apps, including popular ones such as Pandora, Google Maps, and the Facebook app, which Home users need to open in order to publish their own updates, photos, and more.

Home is much more than just another product release. It is Facebook’s opening salvo in the battle for dominance on the mobile web. Consider for a moment its affront to Google. Using Google-made software, it has created a strategy for keeping users on Facebook.

In our conversation Zuckerberg suggests that Home is a good thing for Google. “I think that Google has this opportunity in the next year or two to start doing the things that are way better than what can be done on iPhone through the openness of their platform,” he says. He expects that the elegance of Facebook’s design will cause many of his most enthusiastic users to drop their iPhones in favor of Android devices.

MORE: This kid wants to reinvent virtual reality

But there’s a dark side for Google too. The search giant’s goal is to keep its users in the Google orbit — using Google products. But Home has inserted a layer of Facebook between an Android user and her apps, and it has made Facebook and text messaging simpler and less intrusive. Google, by contrast, requires users to unlock their phones, launch their apps, and click on the Gmail app.

Given Facebook’s engineering prowess it is possible that Home or other Home-like software could expand to the point where the technology totally consumes a device so that it isn’t even recognizable as a Google-powered phone — all thanks to Google’s open-source largesse. Think of Facebook here as potentially like a strangler fig, a type of epiphyte that gloms onto another plant or tree, growing around and over it, competing with its host for nutrients. (Google, which wasn’t involved in the development of Facebook Home, declined to comment on the product, though Zuckerberg confirms that the search giant saw it prior to launch.)

Easy Facebook access is particularly important in parts of the developing world, where the service’s next billion members are just beginning to go online. Data is prohibitively expensive in this part of the world, and Facebook has already struck deals with some carriers in which customers who buy the phones will have access to free data for a period — Facebook pays — and will be able to surf the web, or at least Facebook’s web. Sure, those customers may be buying an HTC or a Samsung phone, and it may be powered by Android, but their first experience of the web will be on Facebook, and possibly soon through Facebook Home.

If the company is successful with Home, that msay also have implications for Apple. Apple is the company that invented the design for the modern smartphone, after all — a window populated by apps. So far, no one has been able to disrupt this design interface, though many companies, including Microsoft, have tried. Most recently BlackBerry’s (BBRY) z10 introduced a new and intuitive approach to navigating the mobile web, but users have yet to embrace it. By attempting to move the design focus away from the names of the services we use on our phones and toward the images of the people to whom we connect, Facebook is introducing a new way to navigate the platform. “We’d love to be able to offer this on iPhone too,” Zuckerberg says. “We just can’t today …”

And though Facebook Home makes its debut without ads, it’s an easy leap to imagine how valuable a newsfeed ad on Facebook’s home screen may be in the future. Says Zuckerberg: “Most of the ads are just sponsored content. We don’t have any yet, but at some point we will.”

There’s always the chance that even Facebook lovers will feel besieged by too much Facebook, or that consumers have already been trained to favor apps over the deeper integration that Zuckerberg is peddling. Or it just might be that in order to be a great tech company in the 21st century, Facebook needs to overhaul itself yet again and figure out a way to make a device and develop its own operating system — or both. Luckily for Zuckerberg, he’s already been through one Facebook reboot, and he has shown he can make the tough calls.

This story is from the April 29, 2013 issue of Fortune.

Update: An earlier version of this story implied that Facebook’s deals with international phone companies are tied to the distribution of its forthcoming Home software. The relationship with carriers is not strictly related to the distribution of Home. To top of page

First Published: April 11, 2013: 6:44 AM ET

so many technology companies don’t evolve to meet the next challenge and ride the next wave, does Zuckerberg have it figured out for mobile?

Posted by admin ~ No Comments

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Your Online Attention, Bought in an Instant by Advertisers

No, wait: make that milliseconds.

The odds are that access to you — or at least the online you — is being bought and sold in less than the blink of an eye. On the Web, powerful algorithms are sizing you up, based on myriad data points: what you Google, the sites you visit, the ads you click. Then, in real time, the chance to show you an ad is auctioned to the highest bidder.

Not that you’d know it. These days in the hyperkinetic world of digital advertising, all of this happens automatically, and imperceptibly, to most consumers.

Ever wonder why that same ad for a car or a couch keeps popping up on your screen? Nearly always, the answer is real-time bidding, an electronic trading system that sells ad space on the Web pages people visit at the very moment they are visiting them. Think of these systems as a sort of Nasdaq stock market, only trading in audiences for online ads. Millions of bids flood in every second. And those bids — essentially what your eyeballs are worth to advertisers — could determine whether you see an ad for, say, a new Lexus or a used Ford, for sneakers or a popcorn maker.

One big player in this space is the Rubicon Project. Never heard of it? Consider this: Rubicon, based in Los Angeles, has actually eclipsed Google in one crucial area — the percentage of Internet users in the United States reached by display ads sold through its platform, according to comScore, a digital analytics company.

Rubicon is among a handful of technology companies that have quietly developed automated ad sales systems for Web site operators. The bidders are marketers seeking to identify their best prospects and pitch them before they move to the next Web page. It is a form of high-frequency trading — that souped-up business of algorithm-loving Wall Streeters. But in this case, the prize is the attention of ordinary people. And it all depends on data-mining to instantly evaluate the audiences available to see those online display ads, the ones that appear on Web sites next to or around content.

In industry parlance, each digital ad space is an impression. The value of an impression depends on several factors, like the size of the ad, the type of person who is available to see it and that person’s location.

“The first impression seen by a high-value person on the opening page of a major newspaper first thing in the morning has a different value than a user from China who is 12 and has been on the Web all day long playing games,” says Frank Addante, the founder and chief executive of Rubicon.

Yet for most of us, real-time bidding is invisible. About 97 percent of American Internet users interact with Rubicon’s system every month, Mr. Addante says, and most of them aren’t aware of it.

That worries some federal regulators and consumer advocates, who say that such electronic trading systems could unfairly stratify consumers, covertly offering better pricing to certain people while relegating others to inferior treatment. A computer-generated class system is one risk, they say, of an ad-driven Internet powered by surveillance.

“As you profile more and more people, you’ll start to segregate people into ‘the people you can get money out of’ and ‘the people you can’t get money out of,’ ” says Dan Auerbach, a staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital civil rights group in San Francisco, who formerly worked in digital ad data-mining. “That is one of the dangers we should be worried about.”

Of course, ad agencies and brands can tailor ads to Web users without real-time bidding. They can also buy ads without aiming them at narrow audience groups. But for marketers, the marriage of ad- and audience-buying is one of the benefits of real-time bidding.

Not so long ago, they simply bought ad spaces based on a site’s general demographics and then showed every visitor the same ad, a practice called “spray and pray.” Now marketers can aim just at their ideal customers — like football fans who earn more than $100,000 a year, or mothers in Denver in the market for an S.U.V. — showing them tailored ads at the exact moment they are available on a specific Web page.

“We are not buying content as a proxy for audience,” says Paul Alfieri, the vice president for marketing at Turn, a data management company and automated buy-side platform for marketers based in Redwood City, Calif. “We are just buying who the audience is.”

Still, for many consumer advocates, real-time bidding resembles nothing so much as a cattle auction.

“Online consumers are being bought and sold like chattel,” says Jeffrey Chester, the executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a consumer group in Washington that has filed a complaint about real-time bidding with the Federal Trade Commission. “It’s dehumanizing.”

FRANK ADDANTE is 36 years old and given to wearing black shirts with a white Rubicon logo on the front. Rubicon is the fifth company he has started or helped to found.

In 1996, in his dorm room at the Illinois Institute of Technology, he developed and introduced a search engine. He later helped found L90, a digital ad technology company that went public and was later acquired by DoubleClick. His fourth enterprise, StrongMail Systems, provides e-mail delivery infrastructure to large companies.

While working in ad technology, Mr. Addante says, he became puzzled by the manual ad sales processes that many Web sites were using. Just a few years ago, he recalled, many sites still executed their online ad deals through the cumbersome back-and-forth of meetings, phone calls, e-mails and even faxes. The fragmented market made it hard for ad agencies and brands.

“That market was very inefficient,” Mr. Addante said in an interview in Rubicon’s Manhattan office, “much like the early days of manual stock trading.”

Of course, other major industries already had automated sales systems. Concert arenas sold seats through Ticketmaster. Airlines sold tickets through a system called Sabre. Hotels offered rooms through Expedia.

So, in 2007, Mr. Addante and three other executives with whom he worked at L90, started Rubicon with the aim of creating an automated marketplace for Web sites to sell their ad inventory. Years earlier, Google invented a similar automated system for search ads.

“Google was the first to automate the buying and selling of search ads,” Mr. Addante says. “We thought, ‘why couldn’t we do this with display ads, mobile and video?’ ”

Although real-time bidding accounts for a small portion of online ad sales, it is growing fast. This year in the United States, advertisers are expected to spend about $2 billion on display ads bought through electronic auction-based exchanges, versus about $733 million in 2010, according to a recent report from Forrester Research. By 2017, the report estimated, that market is likely to reach $8.3 billion.

Rubicon’s customers now include ABC, eBay, CareerBuilder, Glam Media, Time Inc., the Drudge Report and Zynga. Its competitors include major players like PubMatic and Google’s DoubleClick ad exchange.

But Rubicon is not just a sales platform for Web site operators. It’s an analytics system that uses consumer data to help sites figure out how much their visitors are worth to advertisers.

Most sites, Mr. Addante explains, compile data about their own visitors through member registration or by placing bits of computer code called cookies on people’s browsers to collect information about their online activities. To those first-party profiles, Rubicon typically adds details from third-party data aggregators, like BlueKai or eXelate, such as users’ sex and age, interests, estimated income range and past purchases. Finally, Rubicon applies its own analytics to estimate the fair market value of site visitors and the ad spaces they are available to see.

The whole process typically takes less than 30 milliseconds.

“All these calculations have to happen before the Web page loads,” Mr. Addante says. “In our system, inventory is perishable.”

The competition for pricing accuracy has made companies involved in real-time bidding among the Internet’s most aggressive consumer trackers. Among the trackers setting the most cookies on the top 1,000 Web sites in the United States, for example, BlueKai was first, with 2,562 cookies, while Rubicon came in second, with 2,470, according to research conducted last month by the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology.

Consumer advocates say real-time bidding companies are acquiring and commoditizing all of that consumer data with little benefit to consumers themselves — and much digital snooping.

Mr. Addante and other industry executives disagree, saying consumers benefit by receiving ads and offers specifically relevant to them. Their systems do not invade privacy, they say, because they use numerical customer codes — not real names or other identifying details — to collect “anonymous” information about people’s online activities.

For many consumers, however, that Web and search history may seem personal, especially if they visit financial or health sites. Some computer scientists argue that the customer codes assigned to online users are unique ID’s, allowing companies to compile portraits about millions of people — without needing to know their names. Moreover, a few researchers have reported that many sites leak personal information, like names and addresses, to third-party trackers operating on their sites.

That means that rather than being anonymous, those customer code numbers are pseudonymous at best, some computer researchers say.

“It’s like a Social Security number, a number that businesses can use to recognize you on your future visits,” says Rob van Eijk, a computer science researcher at Leiden University in the Netherlands, where he is studying real-time bidding. Yet, he adds, consumers generally remain in the dark as to how automated trading systems rank and shunt them. “Envision a Kafkaesque future,” he said, “where decisions are being made about you and you don’t know what the criteria are based on.”

TICK. Tick. Tick. Tick.

The horizontal ticker at the bottom of Turn’s buy-side trading dashboard registers the groups of users available now to see ads — and lists the bids that Turn’s system recommends for access to them.

The ad spaces, or impressions, sell in lots of 1,000. The price depends on variables like the size and type of ad space, the type of user, and whether the user is in an urban or rural location.

One moment, Turn’s system recommends that an insurance customer bid up to $35.70 per lot being sold by Facebook Exchange, a Facebook service that auctions ad space on the social networking site, and $1.35 per lot being offered by AppNexus, another sell-side platform. That means Turn has identified Facebook’s lots as “premium inventory,” says Mr. Alfieri, Turn’s vice president for marketing, while AppNexus is selling ads on sites where little is known about the users available to see them.

Real-time dashboards like Turn’s, he says, have modernized the online ad trade in the same way that Bloomberg terminals revolutionized Wall Street trading. Ad agencies and brands can now check the intraday prices for various impressions. Many ad agencies have even created in-house “trading desks” to monitor and adjust their bids.

But Turn’s dashboard is more than a real-time ticker. It’s an analytics system that enables clients like insurers or car companies to identify common details among their best customer segments and then bid to show ads to people who resemble those best customers. The machine learning process gets better at pinpointing ideal audiences over the course of an ad campaign.

For example, Turn recently ran an ad campaign for a sneaker company that initially chose to buy a wide variety of impressions nationwide. But as Turn’s system analyzed the early sets of results, it began to separate audiences into the kinds of people who clicked on those sneaker ads, or later searched for the shoes on their own, and those who did not. Identifying common details among those people required the system to comb through its databank of nearly a billion user profiles for each transaction.

(Like Rubicon, Turn uses consumer data from third-party data aggregators for its analyses, Mr. Alfieri said, adding that the company has hired outside software services to strip names and other details from the profiles before Turn receives them).

The results of the sneaker campaign were surprising, says Bill Demas, the chief executive of Turn.

“It turned out that Republicans in certain districts of Texas basically did not exercise. We were able to adjust the campaign to try to aim more at Democrats,” Mr. Demas says. Without analyzing those user profiles, he says, “who would think that party affiliation would be an influence in advertising campaigns?”

In some ways, the consumer segmentation process is not as newfangled as it may seem. For decades in the bricks-and-mortar world, direct marketers have hired third-party data resellers to help them decide which customers should get catalogs or special offers in the mail. Real-time bidding is just a faster, smarter, more automated process for brands to find prospects likely to be the best fit for their products, says Joe Zawadzki, C.E.O. of MediaMath, a buy-side trading platform and data management company in Manhattan.

“How much is a rich person worth? To Mercedes, a lot. To a used Pinto dealer, not a lot,” he says. “It’s a different set of impressions for every marketer. That’s where the magic happens.”

But privacy advocates argue that real-time bidding is more problematic than direct mail because it often involves dozens of business-to-business companies — whose names most consumers have never heard of — collecting information and making instant decisions about them. The concern, advocates say, is that the very same automated bidding system that can distinguish coffee drinkers from, say, tea drinkers, and set different prices to show them ads, is also capable of distinguishing shopaholics or people in debt and potentially auctioning them to high-interest payday lenders.

“The reality looks like ‘we know a person is a sucker and they spend a lot of money on dumb things,’  ” says Mr. Auerbach of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Advertisers will spend more money to target them, and they aren’t savvy enough to know what is happening to them.”

AS real-time bidding gains traction, the consumer data-mining that fuels it is escalating. Yet that surge in surveillance may present a serious risk for online businesses.

The volume of data collection on the Web has surged 400 percent, from an average of 10 collections a page in 2011 to 50 a page this year, according to a study published last June by Krux, a company that helps businesses protect and monetize their consumer data. The report attributed the explosive growth to the ad industry’s shift to real-time bidding.

Krux also warned Web site operators about what it called “rogue data collection.” When publishers allow third parties, like real-time bidding platforms or information resellers, to collect data on their site, the report said, those partners often bring in other data miners whose practices the sites themselves cannot control. Those middlemen may use a site’s proprietary data to help competitors, the report said.

“Publishers who leak data leak revenue,” the report warned. “They face threats from middlemen who steal data and use it to create directly competitive audience-based offerings.”

Those threats may increase as real-time bidding moves more aggressively into mobile sites and apps, entities that may collect valuable information about users’ real-time locations and geographic patterns.

In May, Rubicon acquired Mobsmith, a start-up specializing in mobile ad technology. A few months later, the company announced that it was integrating real-time bidding for mobile ads into its system. Mr. Addante says he expects the industry to adopt real-time bidding for mobile ads faster than it had for desktop display ads. He also predicts that consumers will find tailored mobile ads for, say, a cafe or taxi in their vicinity, more pertinent than many Web ads tailored to them.

“I think mobile ads become more of an information provider than what is happening in display advertising where it has become a nuisance,” he says.

Yet the prospect of ubiquitous real-time bidding — online, on mobile devices and eventually on Web-enabled televisions — also hastens our transition to a totally traceable society. What we read and how we spend our spare time used to be private. Now those activities are becoming windows through which marketers scrutinize, appraise and vie to influence us for a price. Soon there may be no personal spaces left for our private thoughts.

“Real-time bidding creates the possibility for companies to tag you wherever you are going, without you knowing or having the ability to influence it,” says Mr. van Eijk, the computer scientist. “It is becoming a huge imbalance for the ordinary user because, in the end, the ordinary user is the product.”

Real Time Bidding (RTB) to the Demand Side Platforms (DSP) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_bidding

Posted by admin ~ No Comments

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Are You Swapping Emails with Your Accountant to Cheat on Your Taxes?

Did you know that the IRS could be reading emails you’ve written to your accountant that discuss how to avoid paying taxes?

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a request to find out if the IRS is reading your emails without a warrant.  The IRS has yet to disclose whether or not it obtains warrants on every occasion, but the ACLU says they do not.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, enacted in 1986, before email usage was common, states that the government can read your emails without a warrant if the email has been opened or has been sitting in your inbox for over 180 days.   Warrants are only required if the email has not been opened.  The law is obviously outdated.  However, in 2010, a Sixth Circuit appeals court ruled that agencies needed to get a warrant for all emails, either opened or unopened.  It still isn’t clear if the IRS is observing this change in the law.

In addition to being cautious about email correspondence, it’s also a good practice to be careful with any social media commentary regarding tax issues. The IRS will search your social media profiles for incriminating evidence.

The ACLU is calling on the IRS to align their procedures with the 4th amendment. However, until it is certain they are doing this, tax payers must be careful to protect any private conversations about taxes online.  And remember, Accountant’s do not have the same privilege that lawyers do in regards to discussions, research and tax planning. An accountant’s entire file is available for scrutiny. And with email and social media that file extends to the virtual world.

Rather than work with an accountant who will blatantly risk altering your taxes illegally to keep you as a customer, hire a CPA skilled in tax laws who will be able to find “legal” deductions that will save you money and still keep you safe from audits.  Start planning for next year now.

Original Article and Video

Monday, April 15, 2013

Serious Presentation Tips From Standup Comics

Serious Presentation Tips From Standup Comics

April 9, 2013Posted in: Uncategorized

 

A version of this article previously appeared on Inc.

The worlds of standup comedy and business presentations are not as disparate as they may appear at first glance.

Comedians are entrepreneurs. They often write their own material, book their gigs, arrange their travel and negotiate and collect their compensation from club owners. In addition, both comedians and entrepreneurs must engage and entertain their demanding audiences. As such, there is much entrepreneurs can learn from their comic brethren.

If you haven’t already subscribed yet,
subscribe now for free weekly Infochachkie articles!

Comedic Tips

The following characteristics of a successful comedy routine are also applicable to effective business presentations:

1. Strong StartGrab your audience’s attention and tell them who you are and why they must listen.

Due to their limited stage time, comedians must quickly set the tone of their act. Often the success or failure of the opening joke determines how well a routine is received. When appropriate, open your business presentations with an anecdote or personal story that establishes affinity with your audience. Such a story should tell the audience, who you are, what your passion is and why they should share your passion.

2. Physical Humor Use your voice, posture, gestures and physical appearance to establish the appropriate tenor.

Successful comedians are well aware that it is often not what they say, but how they say it, that has the greatest impact. Studies have shown that approximately 55% of a speaker’s communication during the first few minutes of a presentation is nonverbal, while an additional 38% is tone of voice. A mere 7% of a speaker’s initial communications comprise the words they utter.

3. Heckler Management Do not alienate your audience by shutting down troublesome critics too quickly.

An audience has a group identity, even when they do not know each other or have any formal affiliation. This effectively creates an “us versus them” paradigm between the speaker and the audience.

Experienced comedians understand this dynamic. They know that if they prematurely shut down a heckler, they risk alienating the crowd. Instead, veteran comedians endure a heckler’s interruptions until it is clear that the audience is also annoyed, at which point the comedian shuts down the heckler with the audience’s implicit approval.

The success or failure of business presentations often rests upon the questions and answers following the formal pitch. An audience member who asks an irrelevant or nonsensical question is analogous to a heckler at a comedy show. The presenter must respond respectfully. If the questioner continues to ask off-base or overly pointed questions, the audience will eventually become agitated. Once their impatience is evident, the speaker should politely dismiss the questioner by indicating they will address their additional questions after the presentation has concluded.

4. Audience Repartee Carefully orchestrate your audience interactions, especially questions and answers.

Comedians often ask their audience questions and make comments about peoples’ wardrobes, dates, drinks, etc. If you pay close attention, you will notice that these comments are often not directed to anyone in particular. However, the audience assumes that the guy drinking the “girlie drink” in the back of the room really exists.

Entrepreneurs clearly are not well served by chiding or mocking their audience. However, soliciting their participation can help keep an audience engaged. If the crowd’s size is intimate, engage participants by using their first names and ask probing questions to uncover hidden concerns and objections. Comedians often ask questions to set up their punch lines. In business presentations, you can deploy the same approach to underscore your key selling points.

5. Rehearsed SpontaneityPractice so thoroughly that your remarks seem fresh and spontaneous.

The documentary The Comedian chronicles Jerry Seinfeld’s effort to create a new comedy routine. It makes clear that even a talented comic’s new material usually bombs. Comedy requires extensive trial and error to separate the bad bits from those that work. The same is true with business presentations.

The next time you attend a comedy show, watch the waitstaff. In most cases, they stoically move about the room, even when the audience is laughing uproariously. Why? Because they have heard the jokes over and over, in the same order and delivered in the same “spontaneous” way. Great comedy appears off-the-cuff and effortless, yet it is usually the result of painstaking practice.

When we took Computer Motion (NASDAQ: RBOT, sold to Intuitive Surgical) public, we conducted a three-week road show in which the executive team gave the same presentation day after day, often multiple times per day. Our most effective presentations were those in which our well-rehearsed “adlibbing” sounded spontaneous. If you prepare thoroughly, you can achieve the same rehearsed spontaneity that distinguishes professional comics from amateurs.

6. SeguesMake it easy for your audience to follow your story, especially when transitioning between its beginning, middle and end.

Proper pacing is of vital importance in comedy. Comedians must allow adequate time for the audience to comprehend each joke and react appropriately. At the same time, too many pauses make for a dull routine.

One way to ensure effective pacing is to establish segues that alert the audience when you move from one subject to another. In comedy, empty phrases such as, “Anyone here from New York?” or “Did you guys hear the news story about… ?” are often used to mark transitions between topics. Such verbal landmarks give the audience a chance to catch their breath, while guiding them to the next subject. Entrepreneurs should afford their audiences similar mental respites and clear transitions.

7. HumorUtilize tactful humor that is relevant to your story.

Deft use of humor is the greatest lesson entrepreneurs can learn from comedians. As described more fully in PowerPoint Presentations That Suck Less, business presentations do not have to be boring. Interjecting humor into your talks, when done judiciously, can make them more engaging, and thus, more impactful. Engaged people are persuadable people.

8. FiniClose with impact and clearly communicate your call-to-action.

Comedians often deploy the bookend technique, in which they reference their opening joke at the conclusion of their show. This gives their performance a feeling of completion and symmetry. Entrepreneurs can utilize this approach as well, by referring to their opening personal story in their closing remarks.

Whatever closing technique you deploy, call upon your inner-comic and end your talk on an applause line that underscores a clear call to action.

Follow my startup-oriented Twitter feed here: @johngreathouse. I promise I will never tweet about standup comedy or that killer burrito I just ate.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook

  • Twitter

  • Delicious

  • LinkedIn

  • StumbleUpon

  • Add to favorites

  • Email

  • RSS

John Greathouse is a Partner at Rincon Venture Partners, a venture capital firm investing in early stage, web-based businesses. Previously, John co-founded RevUpNet, a performance-based online marketing agency sold to Coull. During the prior twenty years, he held senior executive positions with several successful startups, spearheading transactions that generated more than $350 million of shareholder value, including an IPO and a multi-hundred-million-dollar acquisition.

John is a CPA and holds an M.B.A. from the Wharton School. He is a member of the University of California at Santa Barbara’s Faculty where he teaches several entrepreneurial courses.

Note: All of my advice in this blog is that of a layman. I am not a lawyer and I never played one on TV. You should always assess the veracity of any third-party advice that might have far-reaching implications (be it legal, accounting, personnel, tax or otherwise) with your trusted professional of choice.

Get real world advice from John Greathouse, Subscribe Today.

this isn’t funny business B^ )

Posted by admin ~ No Comments

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Apptopia Projects An App’s Future Revenue, True Value

It might be nice to have a crystal ball, I’d love to know what an app is really worth and why!

Posted by admin ~ No Comments

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags:

Thursday, March 21, 2013

Beware of Using Tax Software – or you May Find Your Tax Return Stalled

10,000 taxpayers in Minnesota will be seeing delays in their tax returns due to Turbo Tax software glitches.  13 lines in the program were defective. The software program is used by the majority of electronic filers.

The software issues have now been fixed, but for the 10,000 who filed early they will have to wait much longer than they intended.

The errors were caused by Intuit programming and so far the only problem has been seen in Minnesota.

When using computer software tax programs you risk the chance of similar technical errors, and may possibly miss important deductions that would be easily spotted by a professional CPA.

Read this Mercury News article for more information:

http://www.mercurynews.com/business-headlines/ci_22771498/10-000-turbotax-filings-error-minnesotans-advised-not?goback=.gde_3253582_member_222138761

 

Atlas Consulting Inc.