Why Businesses Must Care About Cloud!

Elasticity is THE key advantage in using cloud services. Traditionally with Information Technology spending, actual demand is either less, or greater than capacity. If I.T. has built out capacity too far ahead of demand, it may result in good service, but the cost is not so pleasing to those concerned with earnings.  Conversely, if I.T. is short on capacity nobody in the company is happy. To understand the true gravity of the opportunity or threat that cloud has on legacy business, let’s start with this:

“Constraints, in general, are likely the single biggest factor why a profitable legacy company can fail in this millennium.”

Of course one could make the argument that this has always been the case. The difference is that because of the tools available to entrepreneurs now, you have very little time to respond to competitive attacks. The legacy companies usually were birthed because of some secret sauce. After they became huge and established the sauce wasn’t secret anymore. However, competition was easily held at bay due to the bigger company’s ability to survive a price war or some other predatory tactic.

There have been books and books written on this subject. My favorite is Judo Strategy: Turning Your Competitors' Strength to Your Advantage, by David B. Yoffie. This book was written well before the term “cloud” was coined. While the practice of Judo is ancient, the fundamental point will never change – and the point is in the title itself. Suffice it to say that if an entrepreneur can figure out a way to deliver some small component of a product to a customer cheaper, better and faster, then he may be able to drive a splinter in that market and thrive. Why? Because the big company’s processes are too fat, too slow and too invested to react quickly enough to head off Mr. Small Potatoes. See the Judo reference?

Cloud is a tool that entrepreneurs will use to strike it rich from here on out, and this will continue to erode legacy market share. However if you’re a legacy company take heart, everyone can play and win at this game.

Watch out though, because cloud is just a tool and you could easily buy the wrong brand, spend too much, fail to measure, implement it incorrectly or fail to establish a timeline. With so much to lose or so much to gain, I can’t think of a single legacy business in this country that shouldn’t be evaluating cloud services in some way and at this very moment.

(Patrick Bouldin is the President & CEO of RunThis Project, specializing in cloud computing strategy and Business Process Improvement.)

Choose the advice wisely...

We All Love Our Heroes

I was straightening up my office after having let it get messy for the last couple of years when I came across an unopened DVD. It was by a well known person who makes money in providing sound financial advice, yet it was dated 2011. I had come across it before so I thought that since I'd be spending a few hours on this task why not pop in the DVD?

Just to save time and space I’ll make this person a she, and call her Janey. Janey makes a living at teaching sound day to day financial advice – and I’ve always respected her – I really have. In fact I still do. The truth is 90% of her advice is sound in any decade: Save, minimize debt, live below your means, etc.

What she missed though was steering people clear of real estate in the (then) current real estate market. She said that so many houses were in foreclosure and that it doesn’t make sense to necessarily buy that first house. “You have far more supply than you do demand”…. Continuing “so, real estate isn’t going anywhere very quickly, at all…”  “Most likely, real estate is going to stay exactly where it is right now, and in some areas through-out the United States it’s actually going to continue to decrease, not increase”. Well, that was wrong – at least in the Dallas – Fort Worth area. Her further advice – if you want to own a home now is as good a time as ever (if you want a house for 5-10 years or more). If you can get a steal of a deal, go for it. – and take it if you have 20% to put down and a 8 month emergency fund.” To be fair, she seemed ok with getting a good deal on a house if you were planning on being there a lot of years. The problem was, the market turned up quickly in many cities and there was an opportunity to pick up good investment property.

Despite her excellent day to day financial advice the fact is that so many people she was describing couldn’t qualify for a loan, but still needed a place to live. So rental property investment should have been one of her leading investment options. You can't break down current financial climate in the same way you break down common financial sense (save, keep debt low, etc).  Being an expert in one area actually doesn't make you an expert in the other.

"Janey" mentioned how a FICO score could affect your ability to rent, that landlords will deny you with a FICO too low. Really?  Not so fast. Is she a landlord? Who is renting? Landlords of residential property don’t put much stock in FICO scores. Why? Because a low FICO score explains why they need your house. It’s not normally people who have the ability to purchase, it is people who can’t qualify to purchase – at least in the last 5 or so years. Smart landlords look at low FICO applicants as opportunity. They look for a track record - a low FICO could be a result of one bad mortgage - yet they earnestly pay everything they possibly can. These people can potentially take the best care of your property and offer several years of hassle free investment income.

Looking back, what was the best move? It depends on where you live and your financial situation. People make their money on doing the opposite of the herd, not the mood of the general consensus. Running for the hills means you will be stuck with everyone else.

...and they can do no wrong...

"Janey's" day to day financial advice is sound: Save, invest, spend without credit, budget, plan for retirement, healthcare planning, estate planning, etc. But, forecasting a specific market in the future is murky and dangerous, and if you followed her investment advice in 2011, more than likely it wasn’t the best investment decision.

I think, for me, the lesson here is stick to what you know. If you invest in real estate you should stick with it. It may mean you have times where you buy and times when you sell – but hard times should never dictate that you stop the business, only that you re-assess how you’re going to conduct it. 

This is a reminder (to me and you) that when taking advice, take it thankfully and graciously, but also cautiously. At the end of the day you and you alone benefit or suffer from what you do. Advice is cheap, regardless of who is selling it. By cheap I mean it's a lot cheaper than negative outcomes in most cases. "Make and Be" your positive outcome. Find successful people in areas of your interest and sign them up as your mentors - that's the best source of advice.

On Today's Mass Shooting and The Predictable Narrative

(Mr. Jones is a fictional father of a slain relative in a mass shooting). Mr. Jones, if we could reduce the number and seriousness of shootings in America would you be in favor of the most stringent governmental monitoring of ALL people, regardless of cause? Would you be in favor of new gun control laws so that everyone that already owns any gun would have to pass a test and house searched? Would you allow your phone to always be recorded, even if you are not suspected of any crime? Would you be in favor of requiring the media to submit articles to the government prior the publication for approval?

As ridiculous and unlikely as those questions would be, how many parents of slain children would say Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes?

Probably ALL of them.

So is it fair and is it helpful to politicize their grief?

No.

CNN's Brooke Baldwin wrote today Furious this has happened again. Furious that nothing seems to be stopping it.

Brooke, what would you do?

Which proposed gun control law would have prevented today's tragedy if it turns out these folks passed legal background checks?

How about Sandy Hook, same question?

The only way I know would be to strip all citizens of all guns and outlaw the sale of all guns to all people, WORLDWIDE. Let's look at that for a minute - of course that's not going to happen, fortunately for innocent citizens. But if it did, how do you collect the guns out there now, for the next 50 years? Any legislative action would take years to make any impact. Of course your intuitive side would have to make room for the reality that the killings would continue.

What would President Obama say on the heels of a mass murder one year after the most stringent gun control law be passed?  hmm... I'm sure there would be something or someone to blame, but not his administration. We really need him to address this issue and look for real, non-political and high impact solutions.

Let's further the hypothetical to the extreme: Let's say you could snap your fingers and instantly ALL guns vanish. All of a sudden good people, bad people, and good people about to go bad have no gun whatsoever. In today's attack there are likely terrorism ties - if this proves out do you honestly think there would not have been an attack with a different weapon? Running a buss off a cliff with another vehicle? Or how about an explosive? Hasty gun control legislation may make us feel good, like we're doing something and it helps our frustration, but it's highly unlikely to make any dent whatsoever - can the LEFT just give us a smidgen of intellect-ion?

Some people ask why is the NRA against background checks in private gun sales?. Personally, I wouldn't necessarily be against a law like that, but how do you enforce it and how would that prevent murderers obtaining weapons? That won't work, seriously. The NRA pushes back so hard because the "solutions" proposed have nothing to do with true prevention and would only take away freedom. If the left were to have that proven to them it's likely they would demand the law anyway, don't you think?

Well then, maybe we should pass that law, but put a five year timer on it - and if the frequency and number of mass attack deaths are not reduced then it automatically reverts. In other words, prove it does nothing and then get on with finding a solution. Of course we could never agree to that because the law would never be revoked in our political climate.

Could I propose a new name for gun control advocates? How about "Anti-Mass murder advocates"? Heck I'd join in, and probably 90% of all Americans too. Can we come up with REAL solutions?

President Obama, instead of saying we need gun control laws because you're not coming up with any real solution, why don't you say my administration has failed, and with the failure of MY FBI to detect the two murderers who had contact with terrorists I will see to it that we find solutions to fix that!?

A common man's view of the Israeli - Palestinian problem

I was listening to Michael Smerconish interview an Italian-Israeli journalist named Rula Jebreal on XM Potus the other day. Initially I had to appreciate that she was at least trying to get both sides of the Israeli – Palestinian story out. Most of us in the US can only make up our mind by the material provided by the biased media. They were congratulating each other that they were getting both sides out, while in my view both of them missed the bigger point. There’s no use in trying to correct the record on who did what to who, and when. While there are many causes to the current dispute more importantly there is a root cause for the inability solve the conflict and move forward. I propose we throw out the problem of the day and insist on disclosing the real cause of ongoing conflict.

The real root cause of the ongoing conflict is that the Palestinian representation framework is flawed. You can't have more than one representative representing you. The reason why there can never be peace between Israel and the Palestinians is because the conflict isn't “Israel vs. Palestine”, the conflict is between the following:

• ·         Israel vs. Palestinian Authority (PA) – the official representative government
• ·         Israel vs. Hamas
• ·         Israel vs. Palestinian Islamic Jihad
• ·         Israel vs. Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine
• ·         Israel vs. Palestine Liberation Front
• ·         Israel vs. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
• ·         Israel vs. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command
• ·         Israel vs. Popular Resistance Committees
• ·         Israel vs. Black September Organization‎
• ·         Israel vs. Fatah‎
• ·         Israel vs. Palestine Liberation Organization‎

Honestly, I will just have to admit I know nothing about most of these, and frankly I just found the list on the net. So, while somebody could easily debate why one Palestinian group shouldn't be labelled terrorist is just missing the point. I’m just a regular guy pointing out what to me should be really obvious.

The point is, there are a bunch of different Palestinian organizations on the list, and each one has to agree to any terms for peace. Israel has ONE government. Israel has politicians who dispute internally, but the final terms from Israel comes from ONE voice, the Israeli government. Palestine continues to lob rockets or dig tunnels even if the majority of the people are happy with terms for peace, why? Because they allow minority splinter groups to keep the battle alive just because they don't get what they want.

Here’s a question to you, the reader, regardless of how you come out on the dispute. Can you honestly say that there would ever be hope for an agreement if Israel is only 1/12^th of the decision?  Meaning, if 12 participants have to be pleased with the proposed solution does it make sense to you that this would EVER happen?  Doesn’t Israel have a right to be 50% represented? Reasonable thinking people know that there is only ONE possible hope for peace between Israel and the many faces of the “Palestinians”, and that is when the People of Palestine truly self-select their representation.

Clearly that has to come first. To be clear, “self-select” doesn’t just mean declaring the victor, it means that the people of Palestine have to do whatever they can to force the will of the people in their land. The Palestinians have to elect their leaders and when the leaders vote on a position then the Palestinian Government dully elected MUST forcibly eject any organization that is not representing the will of the people. How can this be hard to understand? I’m sure and I know there is a big blame game going on, but the current scenario is not the problem, the problem is that Palestine allows itself to be represented by more than one entity – this has to stop or Israel will never be able to negotiate, and they will never stop their blockade.

It is important that the international community put 100% of their focus in solving the problem of splintered Palestinian leadership – that is the long term strategy for peace.

#MichaelSmerconish  #RulaJebreal #XMPOTUS