by cameron | Sep 2, 2009 | banksters, capitalism, geopolitics
I wonder how closely the names on this report map to the Bilderberg Group?
A recent analysis of the 2007 financial markets of 48 countries has revealed that the world’s finances are in the hands of just a few mutual funds, banks, and corporations. This is the first clear picture of the global concentration of financial power, and point out the worldwide financial system’s vulnerability as it stood on the brink of the current economic crisis.
A pair of physicists at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich did a physics-based analysis of the world economy as it looked in early 2007. Stefano Battiston and James Glattfelder extracted the information from the tangled yarn that links 24,877 stocks and 106,141 shareholding entities in 48 countries, revealing what they called the “backbone” of each country’s financial market. These backbones represented the owners of 80 percent of a country’s market capital, yet consisted of remarkably few shareholders.
The most pared-down backbones exist in Anglo-Saxon countries, including the U.S., Australia, and the U.K. Paradoxically; these same countries are considered by economists to have the most widely-held stocks in the world, with ownership of companies tending to be spread out among many investors. But while each American company may link to many owners, Glattfelder and Battiston’s analysis found that the owners varied little from stock to stock, meaning that comparatively few hands are holding the reins of the entire market.
via Research – ISNS.
by cameron | Aug 12, 2009 | Australian media
I was doing an email interview with a journo this morning about the introduction of digital radio in Australia and I was asked if I thought, as the radio industry is apparently claiming, that the introduction of digital would lead to an increase in radio listenership. I explained that this certainly hasn’t been the experience in the UK, where radio listenership is STILL in decline five years after the introduction of digital.
(source)
I remember a few years ago when the radio industry in Australia wanted the Howard Govt to give them an exclusive license for “digital radio” in return for their investment in the infrastructure to roll out their digital stuff. This had some folks predicting podcasting would be outlawed. Telling the radio folks to go to hell was one of the Howard Govt’s better decisions.
by cameron | Aug 6, 2009 | Australian media, Podcast
I’m running a twtpoll today about the launch of ‘digital radio’ in Australia. Of course, as far as I’m concerned, ‘digital radio’ is a pretty silly concept. Podcasting has been around for five years and with iPhone and iPods and the like becoming pretty mainstream, podcasting already gives audiences a digital experience. Why would you want to go out and buy ANOTHER device?
Let’s see what exciting benefits digital radio offers, according to the industry’s own site, and compare that to podcasting:
- Clearer sound and improved reception – Check. If you’ve downloaded a podcast onto your own device, you have PERFECT reception.
- Extra features such as extra channels – Check. There are tens of thousands of podcasts.
- pause and rewind radio – Check.
- downloadable music – Check. It’s called “iTunes”, bitch.
- more details about the advertised product – Hmmm. I’d say “Bonk” to think one as we don’t carry much advertised product.
- slideshows – Check. Podcasts in Apple’s AAC format contain slides, if that kind of thing excites you.
- scrolling text – Check. Ye old iPods scroll, but iPhones are far sexier.
- Electronic Program Guides – Check. It’s called your iTunes playlist.
- updated news, sports and racing information – Check. It’s called “the web” and it comes fully-integrated into iPhones.
- Extra channels potentially doubles the number of commercial stations – Oooh “doubles”! That’s twice as much Kyle Sandilands! Podcasting has released tens of THOUSANDS of new ‘stations’.
What do you see in that list that is innovative? Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the last five years, you already have most or all of these features on your iPhone, iPod or mobile phone. And, if you don’t, you will when you buy one. And you’ll have a far wider choice of options that digital radio will offer you.
So far on my poll, 87% of respondents say they are not interested in digital radio. What about you?
by cameron | Jul 20, 2009 | geopolitics
Most of the media coverage of the recent bombings in Jakarta seem to be skirting around the edges of… something.
It seems that the target of the Marriott bombing was a regular business meeting held there – but a regular business meeting involving which companies and organisations?
From combing the various reports, it appears that it was a meeting run by a US-based consulting company called CastleAsia "a Jakarta-based consultancy helping multinationals access local markets." Several mining-related companies were involved, including:
Considering the recent attacks on employees at the Freeport mine in Papua, which have been linked to the country’s own security forces, and Freeport’s history of paying huge amounts of money to members of the corrupt Indonesian military for "protection" and it’s shocking human rights record, perhaps the media and our governments might somehow start to connect these acts of violence with the actions of foreign-owned mining companies in Indonesia?
There are lots of suggestions that Jemaah Islamiyah (or a JI splinter group) is behind the bombings but, as far as I’m aware, they are yet to claim responsibility. On top of that, some analysts are suggesting that JI has been wiped out.
Who stands to benefit from the bombings?
Perhaps it *was* JI and perhaps it *is* a senseless bombing of innocent civilians by a group of crazed religious fundamentalists. However it might also be an easy escape goat, a diversion tactic, a neatly-packaged up scenario to stop most of us thinking further about the issue.
Who stands to benefit from the bombings?
The Marriott share price went down.
The Freeport share price went UP.
Who might want to cause trouble in Indonesia?
The guy who lost their recent Presidential election, Prabowo Subianto, a former General and son-in-law of former President Suharto? Let’s remember that Suharto, friend of Australia and the USA, was an incredibly corrupt and evil man. He was also a great friend of Freeport – as was his son-in-law, Prabowo.
Is there some connection between the election result and the recent violence? Have Freeport changed who they are paying protection money to and this is the payback?
by cameron | Jul 1, 2009 | banksters, Podcast
My guests today help me explore some of the alternatives to the “Big Four” banks in Australia. Let’s say that you, like me, want to completely disassociate yourself from the Big Four – where do you turn? Are there alternatives in Australia?
Yes, say my guests:
Andrew Hadley, COO, Credit Union Australia
Tony Beck, Group Manager, Corporate Affairs, ME Bank (Members Equity)
They both belong to organisations that can provide all of the same services that you get from your bank – and they will do it with less fees and with much more customer service. Why? Both organisations are owned by their members instead of shareholders. In CUA’s case, they are owned by their customers. In ME’s case, they are owned by a group of superannuation firms which, in turn, are owned by their members.
So both organisations exist to provide good service – not solely for the sake of returning profits to shareholders. And, judging by their NPS scores, it makes a difference.
Do you want an independent media?
Today’s music is by:
Rick Estrin & The Nightcats
“U B U” (mp3)
from “Twisted”
(Alligator Records)
Buy at Amazon
