tagged w/ financing
-
Film Finance Attorney, Author, and Lecturer John Cones provides an overview of different types of film financing to help filmmakers decide which to pursue. http://www.baselineintel.com/research-wrap?detail/C8/an_overview_of_film_financeFilm Finance Attorney, Author, and Lecturer John Cones provides an overview of... more
-
-
Film Producer, Consultant, and Teacher Norman C. Berns explains the long road it truly is to bring a cinematic vision to screen. http://www.baselineintel.com/research-wrap?detail/C8/marking_time_in_making_filmsFilm Producer, Consultant, and Teacher Norman C. Berns explains the long road it truly... more
-
-
IN "AGE OF GREED", AUTHOR JEFF MADRICK WRITES HOW WALL STREET'S FINANCING AND AGGRESSIVE MARKETING OF LEVERAGED BUYOUTS CRIPPLED AMERICAN BUSINESS, SABOTAGED COMMERCE, AND ULTIMATELY CORRUPTED GOVERNMENT AND THE POLITICAL PROCESS. CITING EXAMPLES OF HOW REAGAN, GREENSPAN, AND SPECIFIC OTHERS FACILITATED WALL STREET'S SLASH AND BURN BUSINESS PRACTICES, HE REVEALS HOW THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER CONTINUES TO PAY FOR THE DAMAGES WALL STREET CONTINUES TO WREAK UPON THE PUBLIC'S AND THE COUNTRY'S ECONOMY.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=6972http://rt.com/on-air/IN "AGE OF GREED", AUTHOR JEFF MADRICK WRITES HOW WALL STREET'S... more
-
-
http://PizzaBoxFormulaFinancing.com
I have a Financing program that I can set you up with to get you started with the secret formula webinar and I will pay your down payment and your first payment as well leaving you 60 to training with me to start making some awesome money with no cost to you but the easy admin fee.
I have a better software and training for this system that works like clockwork.. give me a call
-NetRockstar
Mark Sansom
(916) 234-0151 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (916) 234-0151http://PizzaBoxFormulaFinancing.com
I have a Financing program that I can set you up... more
-
-
The "most pressing" challenge facing the global recovery is funding banks and governments, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which warned that a major hurdle was looming. The world's banks face a $3.6 trillion (£2.2 trillion) "wall of maturing debt" in the next two years alone, but must compete against governments to secure new financing, the fund said.
:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8449036/Global-recovery-at-risk-from-banks-wall-of-debt-IMF-warns.htmlThe "most pressing" challenge facing the global recovery is funding banks... more
-
-
suzane
-
added this
-
2 years ago
- |
-
Kiva is a San Francisco company that has shown ads around the country that have former President Bill Clinton telling you how you can invest only $25 and get back at least a 95% return on your investment. This sounds all good and well until you start to think about it. What they’re saying is that if you give them $25 you’ll get back at least 95% of that, not 100% of that, but 95% of that. This is like saying give me $25 and I can guarantee a return on your money of at least $23.75. That’s not $23.75 over the $25, but basically give us $25 and we can guarantee you a pay back of $23.75.Kiva is a San Francisco company that has shown ads around the country that have former... more
-
-
Gawain
-
added this
-
2 years ago
- |
-
By David P Shirk
Over the news we have been hearing about the idea of congress raising the debt ceiling. It has been pointed out that if it is not raised, then many entitlements will not be paid. On the flip side if the debt ceiling is to be raised even higher to cover the cost of all the programs that were promised, then there will be no way to meet that debt no matter what you raise taxes to. Indeed both of these options present some very serious problems.
If government entitlements and are not paid, and other contracts are not honored, then there is a very high chance that riots will indeed ensue when peoples dependency on receiving government checks is severed. However if the debt is raised to meet those contracts and entitlements for the coming year, then the amount of resulting debt extension will make the consequences for the following year more dire. Qe2 will not suffice as it still results in more government debt that we the people are bound as citizens to pay. Monetizing the debt (increasing the money supply to meet the debt), will only result in even greater damage for reasons to numerous to name.
Yet as serious as this problem sounds, it is at this point irrelevant. The amount of unfunded debt from 2010 going into this year (which is far more than merely raising the debt ceiling can cover) remains a problem that I have not even seen the news address yet (for more information on the exact amount and to whom it is owed, go to http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd.htm and for the exact breakdown, go to http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/feddebt/feddebt_dec10.pdf ). What you must keep in mind is that the number 4,624,007 is not expressed in the dollar amount, but rather in the millions, meaning that the real rolled over debt is 4,624,007,000,000 – 4.6 trillion.
Politicians on the hill have grown complacent to this number. After all, the same number at the end of 2008 was 4.3 trillion. So if we can continue to carry over debt from one year into the next without a catastrophe, why should they pay it any notice? Given this simple way of looking at things, it would seem like the debt can be allowed to simply continue to go up.
Yet here is the part that no politician wants to mention – how the debts were funded, and how were they rolled over. Heck, your average US subject would never even bother to go to http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd_sbredemptionsissuesbyseries.xls , and find out how this happens. This oversight of tracking how the debt is funded is what will cause the catastrophe. If you want a real jaw dropper as to the impending danger of what is happening, I encourage you to open the link. The amount of bonds outstanding (the money received by the government for the sale of the bonds), is not nearly enough to meet the debt rolled over from 2010 into 2011, let alone to fund this year’s budget. This is why the raising of the debt ceiling is irrelevant. The outstanding debt was 4.6 trillion – the amount of bonds it had to back it was only about 2.2 trillion, meaning that for the first time, we have 2.4 trillion dollars of debt, and absolutely no way to answer it.
In 2008 people like Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente, and Ron Paul warned of this danger. Yet so blind are most people to the nation’s economy, they laughed at them. The three people I just mentioned attempted to break the problem down into laymans terms knowing that most people would be lost if they dug into the specifics – and because people attack what they do not understand, they mocked them. The sad reality is that people missed the point of their arguments completely, and what is coming very soon is the result.
Yet those 3 (amongst many others) made 1 last warning knowing that the spending of government would not slow – and that was the danger of monetizing the debt. Monetizing the debt would mean that the FED would simply print the money into existence. Outside of running the very high risk of creating hyperinflation, there is of course another danger.
The Federal Reserve is not a government entity. It is a private banking institution owned by people who have little to do with our government. Their sole responsibility was to create a ....
http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?p=3872By David P Shirk
Over the news we have been hearing about the idea of congress... more
-
-
By David P Shirk
Technology is a very useful tool, especially if you happen to be a bank or financial institution seeking to maintain control of a nation’s monetary means. Or – a government that hails such nonsense as the only way to bring about order and peace. The truth is that the wheelbarrows of inflated money probably will not happen thanks to the wonders of technology, but what is to come is far worse. The reality is that those who clamor for financial regulation fail to see how such regulation furthers government power at our expense – not the fat cats.
For instance, Qe2 (quantitative easing) has the goal of injecting 500 Billion dollars into the market. Well, that’s the common misconception anyway. Sadly, despite this insane amount of money being tossed about (nearly $1,600 for every living man, woman, and child in the US), I would bet my bottom dollar that at least a third of the US population has never even heard of it. Of the two thirds that have, about one probably thinks it is simply the treasury printing more money, giving it to banks, and the banks will simply be lending it out to we the people to help our finances. The final third is divided, but smell a rat.
The main complaint of Qe2 seems to be the all too real threat of hyperinflation. The most historic example of such a policy gone wrong was after WWI when Germanys’ currency was printed to an excess so extreme that their money became worthless. Too much money, not enough goods. Yet inflation itself has little to do with the price of goods – that is merely the result of inflation. Inflation is in all reality the increase of money supply (hence the term), and until recently, was not measured by the price difference in a gallon of milk (a layman’s example – CPI for the more savvy). Yet the idea that such a thing happening today to such an extreme as in post WWI Germany is a little misrepresented, and therefore people tend to miss the bigger picture.
First off all, we need to remember that the bulk of what is on the banks balance sheets does not exist in terms of money that can be used by anyone at a store. In other words – the money that we use in bills and coinage represents less than 10% of what the banks have on their books. This is nothing new and has been going on for well over 30 years now. So the idea that an increase of $1,600 for every living person in the US will see us all pushing around wheelbarrows full of useless paper money is a little unrealistic. It is this fact however that has caused the US in large to completely ignore the danger of inflation for as long as they have.
So a gallon of milk may have gone up maybe a 30% in the last few decades – big deal. As long as people think of inflation as the increase in the price of groceries, some may just be able to justify that. Yet houses have in most cases gone up about 300%, and they cost far more then groceries. The price of renting an apartment has also skyrocketed percentage wise versus the 30% milk. Gas? Well, we all know that one. As to incomes produced from all this money – fairly flat for the last 30 years.
By not having to print wheelbarrows full of cash to pay for houses etc., and keeping the dollar amount on balance sheets only, the banks have figured out how to inflate a currency without people ever seeing it as a real problem. So money supply has become to the average person what the Greek God Zeus would be to a Christian – a mythical being that possesses no basis in reality. If you cannot see it, then it does not exist. Computers and intranets are needed to track the billions of cashless exchanges made each day. These provide the banks with the means to shift billions of dollars around each day that simply do not exist (at least to us peons anyway). So while many of us use technology like the internet to learn and expand our horizons, the banks use it as a dangerous weapon. I think the irony of that fact can only be eclipsed by the irony that our government places banking institutions as the #1 priority when it comes to cyber protection. Using an unconstitutional institution with an unconstitutional controller funding trillions in government debt while indebting an entire nation, the FED has really outdone itself.
But that is hardly the best part.
Qe2 is not new idea, and was already tried back in 2008. In 2008 the Fed purchased 1.7 trillion in US treasury and mortgages backed securities. That did not work, and we were told repeatedly by Obama, Bernanke, Geitner, etc., that the reason why is that it simply was not enough. That was over $5,400 for every living person in the US (1,700,000,000,000/310,000,000). How did such a large amount of money get thrown around, and at the same time, accomplish nothing?
First off – note what the money actually went to – buying the debt from the government and financial sectors (the ones who hold the mortgage backed securities). Keeping in mind that the Federal Reserve funds the US treasury, prints its money, and controls it, we know that the US Government and the Federal Reserve have a symbiotic relationship. This adds insult to injury. The insult is that those who chose to live within their means have their savings diminished by a body they have no say over. The injury is that those who speak up are either labeled as simpletons for attempting to put this problem into perspective in layman’s terms, or an idiot who dares believe themselves to be smarter than the government and FED.
Second is that the FED said something quite brilliant that pretty much sums up the whole mess. Simple put – the belief of people in a policy is the reality. This is after all how they have managed to get away with robbing us blind since 1913. As long as they can prolong the consequences and create the perception that they are acting in our best interest, the FED is in affect untouchable. Naturally it is not a true statement of reality, but rather how they can even flaunt their strategy, and the majority still does not get it despite hearing it straight from the horse’s mouth so to speak. Their perception on the whole matter has created a temporary reality that in the end brings ruin to entire nations. Government says a debt based economy is a good thing via central control via the FED. Let’s break that idiocy down shall we?
Debt – something that is owed or that one is bound to pay to or perform for another; a liability or obligation to pay or render something; the condition of being under such an obligation. National – of, pertaining to, or maintained by a nation as an organized whole or independent political unit; national affairs; owned, preserved, or maintained by the federal government; peculiar or common to the whole people of a country; devoted to one’s own nation; patriotic; concerning or encompassing an entire nation.
National Debt – money owed by everyone (that by definition is patriotic to pay – gag). $14,000,000,000,000/310,000,000 peop....
http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?p=3867By David P Shirk
Technology is a very useful tool, especially if you happen to be a... more
-
-
Today, we are proud to announce the launch of the world’s most unreasonable Web Series – Unreasonable TV! Each week, we’ll release 10 minute episodes that document what happens at the Unreasonable Institute. Through these episodes, we welcome you inside the walls of the Mansion to witness the trials and tribulations of the Unreasonable Fellows as they work to create ventures that shape the course of history. Join us today to witness the very beginnings of the first Unreasonable Institute of all time.Today, we are proud to announce the launch of the world’s most unreasonable Web... more
-
-
1/7/2010 Judge Napolitano explains why Timothy Geithner could face criminal charges over AIG coverup.1/7/2010 Judge Napolitano explains why Timothy Geithner could face criminal charges... more
-
-
You can use it to find out if you are living within your means and how your budget compares to an ideal, recommended budget. Use this App to find tools and new creative ways to better organize your budget and identify areas of high spending.You can use it to find out if you are living within your means and how your budget... more
-
-
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is seeking to leverage its scale and its AA credit rating to offer about 1,000 suppliers an alternative to their traditional means of financing deliveries to the retailer. The move could give the world’s largest retailer by revenue more power over its suppliers in the wake of the bankruptcy filing by lender CIT Group Inc.
(O’Connell, V., 2009, November 14, par.1-2)
Wal-Mart informed its suppliers in a Nov. 2 letter of its new “Supplier Alliance Program,” in which eligible suppliers can get payment for their orders in 10 to 15 days within its receipt of goods, compared with the more typical 60 to 90 days. Under the program, suppliers can sell their Wal-Mart invoices to the retailer’s partner banks, including Wells Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., according to the letter, at interest rates based partly on Wal-Mart’s credit rating. In traditional factoring, lenders give manufacturers cash for their receivables and collect payments on those invoices.
(O’Connell, V., 2009, November 14, par.3-4)
Wal-Mart, of Bentonville, Ark., said the move was aimed at improving the stability of its supply of merchandise, not replace existing relationships. “We know that many of our suppliers are dependent upon factoring and financing companies that are reportedly in financial distress,” Theresa C. Mercado, Wal-Mart’s senior director for product extension, said in its letter, which was sent to a group of about 1,000 of its suppliers, primarily apparel manufacturers. In all, Wal-Mart has about 60,000 suppliers.
(O’Connell, V., 2009, November 14, par.6)
A few retailers have begun experimenting with supply chain finance programs as alternatives to traditional factoring. In July, Kohl’s Corp. sent its suppliers a letter promoting a “reduced” 3.5% annual percentage rate of interest through its Supply Chain Finance program. The program, developed by PrimeRevenue, lets suppliers get paid early once their invoices are approved for payment, it said. The suppliers sell their invoices to Bank of America at an interest rate based on Kohl’s credit rating. Kohl’s, based in Menomonee Falls, Wisc., offered the program to 41% of its suppliers, and so far 11% have signed on, said Kohl’s spokeswoman Vicki Shamion. “This is not about CIT, but rather a proactive opportunity” for Kohl’s and its supplier partners, she said.
(O’Connell, V., 2009, November 14, par.8-9)
Suppliers might be more inclined to give certain retailers “preferential treatment” because of such programs, said Pratap Mukharji, a partner with consultant Bain & Company. It’s possible the arrangement could influence “how a supplier would look at a Wal-Mart, especially if, in a difficult economy, this program lets a supplier stay in business or make more money,” Mr. Mukharji added. Many retailers fear that once the economy recovers, their suppliers may struggle to fulfill the increase in shopper demand for certain products because they may not have access to the increased working capital needed to boost production. “The lack of visibility that retailers have into the true economic condition of some of their smaller suppliers is a big concern,” Mr. Mukharji said.
(O’Connell, V., 2009, November 14, par.10-11)
Wal-Mart says it hopes the program will result in a more stable supplier base and more predictable supply of merchandise. Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley said its AA rating should result in “more attractive” interest rates for many of its suppliers than they could otherwise get. At Fitch Ratings, for instance, Wal-Mart is currently the highest-rated retailer, with a AA rating, while Kohl’s is rated BBB+, a Fitch spokeswoman said.
(O’Connell, V., 2009, November 14, par.12)
Source link:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703683804574533821208957360.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://theretailsector.wordpress.com/2009/11/15/walmart-closes-supplier-gap-with-new-financing-plan/Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is seeking to leverage its scale and its AA credit rating to... more
-
-
jmsrmy
-
added this
-
3 years ago
- |
-
Energy Secretary makes a annoucement about project financing, XsunX says it uses a different more efficient process for the solar industry, and Scottsdales Ecotality Inc. get stimulus for charging stations. Enjoy the broadcast and to see more please visit www.greenstocksrock.comEnergy Secretary makes a annoucement about project financing, XsunX says it uses a... more
-
-
Noooooo - say it isn't so!
"In the latest challenge to the American movie business, a crucial source of funding for independent films -- sales of foreign-distribution rights -- is rapidly drying up.
For decades, independent movie producers in the U.S. have routinely been able to fund their films by selling the rights to distribute them abroad. If the production featured a big-name actor or director, the rights were often sold before the movie was finished, providing producers with 50% or more of their production budget.
Even movies with top actors or directors are having trouble raising money from the sale of foreign-distribution rights.
But today, due to factors ranging from the credit crunch to burgeoning online piracy, even the biggest names aren't always enough to sell an American film abroad.
When Graham King, a Hollywood film producer who won an Oscar in 2007 for "The Departed," sent marketing packages for two of his coming projects to the Berlin Film Festival earlier this year, he figured they would attract crowds of buyers. "The Rum Diary" features Johnny Depp, star of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise and one of the most bankable actors in Hollywood. "London Boulevard" is expected to cost just $30 million and stars Colin Farrell and Keira Knightley.
But very few buyers bit. Mr. King had projected that foreign sales would account for roughly 60% of the $45 million budget for "The Rum Diary." "In a normal market, with Johnny Depp, we'd be sold out by now," he says.
For years, distributors in such markets as France, Germany, Japan and Latin American nations at times would pay millions of dollars for the rights to distribute American movies, like last autumn's teen hit "Twilight" from Summit Entertainment and indie sensation "The Wrestler."
In the 1990s, those sums frequently would cover a film's entire budget. In more recent years, it would cover a significant amount and, with a portion of their budgets in hand, producers could more easily secure loans or equity for the rest of their financing.
The rise of copyright piracy and increasing competition from local films have held a lid on presales of foreign rights in recent years. But since the credit crunch hit Wall Street and expanded across the globe, producers say they feel lucky if presales cover half of their budgets -- if anything at all.
Moreover, the billions of dollars that Wall Street poured into the film industry before the crunch created a glut of independent films that allowed distributors to be more selective -- or simply to wait until a film was finished to make a decision.
"In the old days, it was like selling sausages," says Kathy Morgan, president of film-sales firm Kathy Morgan International. "We'd joke, 'how many pounds of movies do you want?' But those days are gone."
Other influences have stopped foreign buyers from picking up American film rights in recent months. The dollar's rise against the euro has sharply curtailed the amount that some distributors outside the U.S. can spend on acquiring movies. And, as ad revenues have plunged, the TV market in some countries, such as Spain, has collapsed.
Many foreign distributors used sales of films to television to finance their film purchases. Without those deals, they can't spend the same money on acquisitions. All of that has caused some distributors to shut their doors.
Graham King, the Oscar-winning producer of 'London Boulevard,' which stars Keira Knightley and Colin Farrell found few buyers at the Berlin Film Festival earlier this year.
"The number of reliable independent distributors has shrunk considerably over the last few months," says one studio executive who specializes in foreign deals.
In addition, shifting tastes in many markets have favored local films over American fare. The breakout success in France of "Welcome to the Sticks" last year and, more recently, "LOL (Laughing Out Loud)," has persuaded some distributors to stick with products made on their native ground.Noooooo - say it isn't so!
"In the latest challenge to the American movie... more
-
-
(New York Times) Americans for the Arts, a lobbying group, plans to ask Congress on Tuesday to increase the annual appropriation for the National Endowment for the Arts to $200 million from the $155 million that was provided for the agency in the recent omnibus bill. The request will come on the group’s 22nd annual Arts Advocacy Day. In the past the organization has requested $176 million for the agency, the amount the Endowment was given at its highest financing, in 1992. But this year the need of arts institutions is greater, the group has said, and President Obama said during the presidential campaign that he would request an increase. About 500 arts advocates are expected to meet with about one-third of Congress on Tuesday. Among those scheduled to testify before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies are the singers Linda Ronstadt and Josh Groban, and the jazz trumpeter Wynton Marsalis.(New York Times) Americans for the Arts, a lobbying group, plans to ask Congress on... more
-
-
The Night Shift is now available on DVD! The DVD can be purchased at the Fighting Owl Films online Shop via their website at www.fightingowlfilms.com. Fighting Owl Films is currently working to produce a feature-length version of its hit short film The Night Shift. All proceeds from DVD sales go toward helping them finance their feature film.The Night Shift is now available on DVD! The DVD can be purchased at the Fighting Owl... more
-
-
Gukbe
-
added this
-
4 years ago
- |
-
BARACK OBAMA held out the hope of salvaging part of the public financing system for presidential elections. Now he seems poised to drive a nail into it by rejecting the $85 million available to nominees who agree to take full federal funding for the general election. That may be understandable as a matter of campaign tactics; Mr. Obama sits atop a whirring money machine that appears capable of vacuuming up amounts far in excess of the federal check. But going back on his pledge to take public financing if the GOP nominee were to agree to do the same would be an unfortunate step -- and one that reflects badly on Mr. Obama.BARACK OBAMA held out the hope of salvaging part of the public financing system for... more
-
