I KNOW you’ve been hassled by beggars about 100 times at least in your life. And nothing drives me crazier than people standing around begging. I absolutely NEVER give them money.

So, do you think that makes me an a-hole? Because I’m not. I’ve donated more to charity than most people will in a lifetime. What it makes me is not a sucker.

Let Me Explain

The following series is a set of photographs of some beggars in China. A reporter followed them around and took pictures of them at work.

At first we see a man who appears to be practically near death being cared for by his loving wife. So many people feel bad for them and stop to help.

After a little while, they get up to move to another location.

Here they are, back at work again.

After a while, I guess they have to set something up for their next score?

Then they are on the move again.

This time, to grab a decent meal before they go “back to work”.

I know, you’re thinking this is not common, right? WRONG!

Video Proof

Here are two different stories from the US of undercover TV reporters documenting the reality behind begging and panhandling in America. If you do a search, you’ll find plenty more!

How to Be a Great Beggar

Now, a video that tells you everything you need to get out there and start earning today! Just trade in your dignity for some cold hard cash.

Bottom Line

So, what’s the bottom line here? Did you hear the lady who works for the homeless shelter tell you – do not give panhandlers money? I mean that kind of says it all. But hopefully you now understand why.

I know that when you see them your mind is racing. “I wonder what’s wrong? How did they get that way? I feel sorry for them.” But as long as you are aware that they are working hard to engineer that response from you, you can resist it!

People who start begging become addicted to the easy cash, and very rapidly stop even trying to accomplish any noble goal they had before they started. So next time, just ignore them or tell them you only donate to national charities.

None Found

It goes without the saying that comparing wealth and spending in different countries is almost impossible: people work, earn and even spend differently – moreover, their ways of life and views can be too different to compare.

However, we still try to compare because people move around the world and they want to know what they can expect in different corners of the globe.

Here are the 10 greatest examples of information graphics comparing money, spending and earning around the world:

1. U.S. Education vs. The World

U.S. Education vs. The World is a great informational graphic by MAT@USC that compares the United States’ education spend and performance versus eleven countries of the world. I love the smart use of a venn diagram that lets you see the differences between different countries at a glance. The colorful design here is a great example of how boring data can look fun when visualized.

The most interesting finding of the stats research and the visualization:

The U.S. is the clear leader in total annual spending, but ranks 9th in Science performance and 10th in Math.

Note: It is unclear what was the measure used to compare the countries in their math and science performance.

2. Most Expensive Cities of the World

Most Expensive Cities is the World is an interesting visualization by Home Loan Finder. The mot interesting part of the infographic is the comparison chart that lets you quickly compare the cost of living. The table works great as it picks very familiar things that are easy to recognize (like monthly rate and fast food).

The most interesting finding of the stats research and the visualization:

Based on the labor-cost-versus-pricing rate, Zurich seems to be the best place to live in.

Note: All the prices in different cities are estimated in USD.

3. Labor Cost in Different Countries

Labor Cost around the World is an ingenious and somewhat minimalistic visualization of how much labor costs in different countries. It also uses U.S. labor cost as the basis to compare all other countries against it. The visualization works particularly well due to the dark background color.

The most interesting finding of the stats research and the visualization:

To earn as much as an average American earns per year, an Indian has to work more than 24 years.

Note: “Minimum wage” here is the relationship of the countries’ currencies to the US dollar while it is correct to state that the true minimum wage has to do with what can be purchased by a person’s own currency within each specific country.

4. People’s Spending Around The World

What Your Global Neighbors Are Buying is a tree- and a pseudo-map visualization from The New York Times. The graphic visualizes how buyers all over the world spend their money. Boxes stand for different countries while the color and size represent the actual spending (2007). The map is interactive: you can roll over each box to see the actual number.

The most interesting finding of the stats research and the visualization:

Recreation is the most popular way to spend money – and it is true for most countries of the world.

Note: It would be great if the infographic also reflected gender differences. This article on Gender and Money via Rather Be Shopping offers a nice summary of how men and women spend money and shop differently. I wonder if these differences are true for all other cultures as well.

5. Life Expectancy & Retirement Years

Who spends the most years in retirement? is an interesting infographic from Flowing Data that overlays the average years in retirement across the world.

The most interesting findings of the stats research and the visualization:

In Mexico men tend to work up to the last year of their lives whereas women in Austria spend an average of 26 years in retirement.

Note: People who reach the retirement age are likely to live longer than the estimated life expectancy (The older you get, the longer your life expectancy because you already have avoided dying younger. ). This means that the time spent in retirement is generally longer than what this chart shows.

6. Wealth Distribution around the World

Wealth Distribution around the World via Live Silver Prices is an informational graphic that visualizes distribution of income across the globe. The darker the green color, the higher income level distribution.

The most interesting findings of the stats research and the visualization:

It is nice to see that countries like USA and Russia are at the same level.

Note: Although this map is entitled “Wealth Distribution”, it actually is based on the Gini Coefficient of income, not wealth.

7. Public vs Private Healthcare Spending Around the World

Public vs Private Healthcare Around the World compares health care costs and spending around the world.

The most interesting findings of the stats research and the visualization:

700, 000 of Americans are forced into bankruptcy because of medical bills every year.

Note: What these figures don’t take into account is that in the other featured countries of the world (apart from the USA), much of the medical schooling is paid for by the government whereas in United States most doctors finish their training with huge student loans – this largely affects the healthcare cost here as well.

8. United States vs. World Gas Prices

Are you also affected by the rumor that gas prices are the highest in the United States? This map infographic by Flowing Data will be a relief. Countries colored red typically have higher prices, while those colored green typically have lower prices.

The most interesting findings of the stats research and the visualization:

The gas discrepancy is enormous. Some countries, like UK, pay up to $9 per gallon, while others, like Venezuela, have incredibly low gas prices at 9 cents per gallon.

Note: The infographic is based on Wikipedia data and Wikipedia doesn’t have data for all countries, unfortunately.

9. Struggling Countries Around the World

This large infographic sums up enormous amount of information from the map overlay of the countries that donate most to developing countries to top recipients of gross ODA.

The most interesting findings of the stats research and the visualization:

According to Harper’s Index, two-fifths of the world’s total population is living in a “severely water-stressed environment.”

10. The Travel Global Spend

The Travel Gold Rush 2020 (via Timeshare Secrets) is s research study and visualization prepared by  Oxford Economics that illustrates the fast growth of travel spending across the world. The main news is that global travel spend is projected to double between 2010 and 2020.

The most interesting findings of the stats research and the visualization:

Europe is going to see the greatest increase in visitor traffic (~190 million incremental visitors), with Asia-Pacific experiencing the largest rate of growth (65%).

Are you aware of any other interesting global comparisons visualized? Please share them in the comments!

None Found

Last night I went to pick up a few groceries to replace items for the week. While moving through the cereal aisle I saw a box of a generic brand of granola bars that I wouldn’t normally purchase. But the price had been reduced to $1.99, so I decided I would grab a box. Later at home I was putting them away and I started to wonder why I had gotten the things in the first place. I didn’t especially like them, and while my kids would enjoy them they were so packed in sugar that I wouldn’t normally give it to them.

I had fallen for an old sales trick that researchers say is a highly effective on in today’s market. Studies have shown again and again that when a customer sees the tell-tale $.99 ending on any price, they are more likely to buy than if there is a cent more in price, pushing the tag to show $.00. This is such an extreme compulsion that someone might even spent $1,299.99 on a television without considering the price as closely as the same person who would reject buying a similar television for $1,300.00.

A Bargain or a Scam?

What is important to remember is that just because the price says it is a $.99 deal, you aren’t necessarily getting a steal. The numbers indicate some kind of cut price, when the different between the tag price and the retail price are miniscule at best, nonexistent at worse. I learned that the hard way when my own price check revealed that the granola bars I had bought, which I didn’t even want, cost the same whether by a single cent as they normally did. But I had immediately assumed it had to be some kind of discount.

According to Dr. Russell Winer of New York University, it is all a matter of perception versus reality.

“I think this is all consistent with the idea that odd prices act as an information-processing reduction, indicating a product is a deal. Just because the price ends with 99 cents, it doesn’t mean it’s a really good deal.”

Whole Numbers Versus .99

This is something that is used all over the world. However, in some countries there is an opposite view. The generations in Poland that lived under the harsh regime of the Soviet Union were often subjected to such methods to promote an ideal of fair trade. Because of this, when they see a price ending in an odd number they feel they are being manipulated and will be turned off of the product. They prefer round numbers, which show an honest, straightforward price.

In the United Kingdom, several high end stores have consistently kept price tags in whole number values. This, they feel, reflects the quality of the product being better than those of other stores. When they use the strange prices they often see the type of customer meeting their demographic less willing to make a purchase.

However, in most countries, the UK included, the tactic works in low – medium range shops for any number of items. It is as important a marketing method as showing the “original price” crossed out on the sticker.

Smart Shopping

This doesn’t mean that you will be unable to get a good deal on something that ends in .99. Not everyone in the business world is trying to scam you, and some may be serious cuts in the original price. The trick is to comparison shop long before you go into the store. With the introduction of online shopping, this is not at all a difficult task. Especially as there are plenty of websites dedicated to comparing prices, both by users and webmasters.

So, what do YOU think? Does the .99 cent effect work on you? If not, how do you avoid it?

cc licensed flickr photos shared by PetroleumJelliffe, Joel Franusic and nate’sgirl

None Found

I found this fascinating. A few weeks ago we celebrated Mother’s Day here in the US, and when I was watching the news they reported that Americans will spend $2.5 Billion on jewelry, and another $3 Billion taking moms out to eat. And there was more money to be spent in other categories too ($Billions).

When I saw that, it kind of floored me. After all, we’re talking about $5.5B on food and entertainment in a single weekend. Which is actually more money than the 50 poorest nation’s entire annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Seriously, if you head over to Google’s public data explorer you can graph out these GDPs and see just how excessive things are.

So, next time you’re whining about how crappy our economy is right now, let me remind you that you probably spent like $300 on food and a gift for Mom – and that is more money than people in Afghanistan earn in a year. So quit your whining and get back to work!

None Found

For a long time now I’ve been hearing people predicting the death of traditional media (you know: television, radio, books and newspapers). “Old Media is dead! Long live New Media!”

This is 50% crap, but it’s also 50% true. And since I’ve been fielding a lot of questions about this lately, let me see if I can break it down for outsiders in terms that are a little easier to understand and have some actual logic behind them.

The real magic of “new media” has nothing to do with the people. It is quite simply all about the delivery mechanism.

An Academic Explanation Using Simple Economics

In any industry, the cost of goods produced are ultimately borne by the buyers of the finished product. So, for example, if the price of steel goes up, the price of automobiles goes up as well.

But imagine a situation where a radical new material is developed that costs 1/100th the price of steel, but which is actually stronger, can be made in an ordinary kitchen, and can be used to build cars just as well!

What happens to the auto industry?

• Vendors who spent billions tooling up and staffing to work with the old technology have a huge investment problem on their hands. All of a sudden, their tools are essentially worthless.
• Their staff, which is equipped to deal with the old methods of production suddenly require massive retraining. They’ve essentially been obsoleted.
• Buyers learning of the new “upcoming” technology will stop purchasing the old stuff and begin waiting for the new ones.
• The value of obsolete products will plummet, and the price will follow.
• However, in the midst of industrial ruin and falling prices, an even greater demand for the new technology will emerge to fill the void. It’s simple supply and demand. As the price drops, more buyers emerge – but now they want the new stuff!

With the introduction of this disruptive new technology, the auto manufacturers who quickly recognize that the game has radically changed and who are tough enough to make very difficult decisions and retrain / retool for the future have a chance at survival (those who don’t will cease to exist). And because of the new radically decreased cost structure, new entrants will emerge in the market.

What’s All This Got To To With New Media?

Let’s apply the same exact logic to the Television industry. Consider that for most of the last century if you wanted to deliver programming to a large market, the barriers to entry were substantial.

• You had to purchase broadcast rights for airwaves from some governing body.
• Substantial investments in recording and broadcast equipment had to be made.
• Global reach required actual satellites! Mucho dinero!!!

Well, the good news is that the advertisers who supported the industry (the buyers) understood the cost to produce the end product and were willing to support it because there was, after all, no competing technology to deliver the same results.

But one day a few years ago, the industry woke up and learned that something had fundamentally changed. All of a sudden anyone with a camcorder, a computer, and an internet connection could reach the exact same audience – but for a tiny fraction of the cost! (The invention of the internet is like that new steel replacement we just discussed, for 1/100th the cost!)

The results of this radical change in technology? Well, its exactly the same as our auto industry above:

• Vendors who spent billions tooling up and staffing to work with the old technology have a huge investment problem on their hands. All of a sudden, their tools are essentially worthless.
• Their staff, which is equipped to deal with the old methods of production suddenly require massive retraining. They’ve essentially been obsoleted.
• Buyers learning of the new “upcoming” technology will stop purchasing the old stuff and begin waiting for the new ones.
• The value of obsolete products will plummet, and the price will follow.
• However, in the midst of industrial ruin and falling prices, an even greater demand for the new technology will emerge to fill the void. It’s simple supply and demand. As the price drops, more buyers emerge -but now they want the new stuff!

In this case, the buyers are simply the advertisers, who are deciding to hold off on the old advertising expenditures and shift some of that spend to the online medium to try and reach the same number of eyeballs at a dramatically reduced price.

The Real Impact of Decreasing Production Costs

Now, it’s not that the viewers or the advertisers have actually gone anywhere. In reality, there are more people willing to watch, and more people wanting to get their advertising message out now than ever before! But the reach of “new media” personalities has now matched their “traditional media” counterparts, and is threatening to overtake them. For example:

• I personally reach an audience of hundreds of thousands each month with this little blog.
• Cali Lewis reaches an audience of millions each month with GeekBrief.TV.
• Leo Laporte likely reaches tens of millions each month with his various shows.

But our costs to reach these eyeballs are radically lower, so advertisers now have the opportunity to pay a lot less to reach the same end goal, while Cali, Leo and I can easily maintain the same or greater margins for selling our services.

So, yes you will see new personalities emerge in the New Media era. These are the ones who recognized the change early, tackled the learning curve, and effectively carved out their space. But you’re also going to see the old personalities stick around, if they are able to adapt in the same ways.

As I said, it’s not about the people. It’s about their technology.

The End

Damn, that was a long winded explanation. I’ve got nothing left. But if you care to add to the story please drop a comment down in that little chatter box below cause I’d love to hear it.

None Found

As I wrote over on the WealthNation.FM blog…

Well, I guess they were bound to catch up to us sooner or later. Our supreme editor, Dave Moyer, has compiled the first ever set of Wealth Nation bloopers for your listening enjoyment. Now you can get a real listen “behind the scenes” to see what he has to deal with when he’s cleaning up the episodes.

This will teach us not to be taking extended periods of time off from the show in the future!

Just select the play button below and you can listen to the show right here. You can also visit iTunes and subscribe, follow Wealth Nation on Twitter, or join our Wealth Nation group on Facebook!
Listen to the Show

None Found

I’ve had many people asking about what it takes to actually put together WordCamp Dallas, and there have been a lot of questions specifically involving the costs associated with the event.

I’ve been hesitant to share all the details up to this point for a variety of reasons including:

• Confidentiality for our event sponsors.
• No desire for second-guessing from the bleachers. (aka – I could have done it cheaper!)
• Privacy for myself since it involved cost I picked up.

However, I’ve decided that in the interests of the community I will share as many details as possible so that others who are looking to put on an event of this kind will understand what it’s going to take before they attempt to do it. The last thing we need are surprises, especially where money is involved.

Keep in mind that the costs outlined here were to cover around 350 attendees, plus live streaming of the event to a few hundred more around the world. Also know that WordCamp Dallas 2008 had a similar outcome, but at around 65% of the values here.

Significant costs:

• Food: $8,750 – Lunches, morning coffee & muffins, and afternoon snacks.
• T-shirts: $3,500 – Two sided, two color shirts, plus filled requests for sizes to 5XL.
• ASL Interpreters: $1,600 – To provide sign language for the deaf.
• Venue Costs: $1,500 (est.) – Misc. costs associated with the venue.
• Welcome party: $1,200 – Friday night bowling party for about 90 attendees.
• Speaker’s Dinner: $1,000 – Saturday night dinner, as a thank you to our speakers.
• Speaker Travel: $900 – To cover speaker expenses only where necessary.
• Name badges, etc: $500 – Badges, signs and supplies.
• EventBrite / PayPal: $500 – Fees for processing transactions.
• Power cables, etc.: $350 – Venue specific needs.
• Other: $1,000 – Miscellaneous stuff that adds up quick.

Total: $20,800

Income:

• Ticket Sales: $8,970
• Sponsors: $6,600 ($2,000 received so far)

Total: $15,570 ($10,970)

So, as you can see, there is about a $5,000 shortfall from the event, plus another $5,000 that needs to make it’s way through from the sponsor’s Accounts Payable departments. This can be handled a few ways:

1. Plan the event much farther in advance and give sponsors a hard deadline for payment.
2. Be willing to float the deficit until sponsors come through with payments (what I opted for).
3. Charge more. A ticket price of $50 would ensure that the event was closer to break-even.

The point of the math here is that an event of this magnitude needs a benefactor. There must either be a company or an individual behind it for decision making purposes, financial responsibility, and accountability. Attendees, sponsors and venue personnel must have trust in the entity standing behind it.

Alternatives

Meet-Ups!

It doesn’t require a huge weekend long venue to get people together for a common interest. MeetUp.com will allow you to organize small groups of people and you could have Meet-ups at a home, restaurant, park, or some other reasonable venue.

There is no need to feed people, or by T-shirts, and indeed you can avoid the majority of the costs from this event. Assuming you can get enough folks together you should be able to attract a few speakers who are willing to come share their experience.

BarCamp Style

You can also always go the BarCamp route. If you’ve got a group of folks who can go with the flow, and you can forgo most of the niceties such as WiFi and power for everyone, professional A/V recording, tables and chairs for meals, etc. then you can put together an event at any old place that offers to accomodate you, and invite sponsors to contribute whatever it takes to handle the event without any money changing hands.

People have events like this quite often, but keep in mind that someone still has to take responsibility. So if you are going to organize the event you will be on the hook from a liability standpoint. I highly recommend an Umbrella policy from your insurance provider.

Other Costs and Notes

This year we didn’t have to do it, but last year we had to provide event insurance to cover the city for providing the venue. Event insurance for around 200 people ran about $500-600 as I recall. Be prepared to provide this for just about anywhere you go if you are planning on an organized event. For an example, see the Sacramento State University’s requirements.

Often times, certain venues will require that you use their catering service. This can really increase the cost of an event, so double check to make sure you want to go that route.

Finally, you are going to need a LOT of volunteers. You will need people to do all sorts of labor, otherwise you are going to have to pay out the nose for it. These things include:

• Creating / printing / assembling nametags and signage.
• T-shirt / poster / banner designs and creation.
• Organizing pre or post event parties
• Registration duties
• Q&A (running mics) and Time keeping for speakers
• Event setup and teardown
• Staffing a Genius Bar (to answer WordPress questions for free)
• Videography / Photography
• Webmaster duties and inbound question handling
• Registration management and accounting

That’s just the top 10. You may come up with more.

The End

So, this post is not meant to scare anyone from taking on the challenge of organizing a WordCamp, but rather to serve as a sort of blueprint from with to start the planning. You can scale the various elements up or down as needed depending on the size, budget and type of people who will be attending.

As always, I’m happy to answer questions, or if you need someone to give a lecture and my schedule permits I’m always up for a good WordPress party. Cheers!

None Found

Folks, a few weeks ago I went to the doctor to get a physical. Nothing special whatsoever. Just a routine annual physical. It was a two part visit. The first time I went they took blood to run the normal tests (I’m healthy). Then I went a few days later to see the doctor and get checked out.

So, I leave the office and a couple weeks later I get some paperwork from my insurance company informing me that the doctor has billed them $2,550.00 for the visit, and they were paying $2,046.00 after the healthplan discount. What the FXXK?!?

I’m not kidding when I tell you that the doctor visit was less than 30 minutes. Probably 20 minutes of examination and discussion of the blood test results – which were fine so not much to discuss. So I’m trying to figure out what the hell these OUTRAGEOUS charges are for? I mean, normally we just pay our $20 copay (or whatever) and go on our merry way, but if you wonder why the hell insurance keeps skyrocketing, it’s because the doctors are literally charging $5,000 per hour for blood work and consultation.

I’m so angry about this, it makes me distrust the entire medical community. This was not f-ing spinal surgery. The guy looked in my ears, squeezed my stomach, and sent me on my way. It’s got to be one of the biggest shams in the history of all damn time.

Has this happened to anyone else? And why isn’t everyone outraged?

None Found

The story begins when I decided I wanted to obtain a domain, related to OneMansBlog.com, that was already taken and which I quickly determined was parked and had been registered at Sedo.

Sedo is a large, accredited top level domain registrar. So, I first did a quick search on their site to see if the domain was listed for sale, and when it wasn’t found I decided to check out their offer to “broker” the purchase for me.

Now, I thought about this for a minute and realized that if I were to approach the domain owner myself they would likely see that I own OneMansBlog.com and then be anxious to charge me extra for the related domain. So it sounded reasonable to enlist the assistance of a middleman in the process.

After reading all of Sedo’s documentation regarding rules and policies, I ultimately decided to give it a shot. We created an account and filled out the form to get them started. As part of this form, Sedo asked for the MAXIMUM amount that we were willing to bid. At first this made me very nervous, but they provide a link right there on the page that offers the following explanation:

Question

What is an investment limit?

Answer

When you apply for Sedo’s buyer-side brokerage service, you will be asked to enter your investment limit for purchasing the domain. Your maximum investment limit is the highest price you would be willing to offer for the domain. This information is confidential, and will not be disclosed to the domain owner. As always, your broker will begin negotiations at a fraction of your investment limit and will work to acquire the domain at a fair and reasonable price.

If your application is approved, your broker will use your investment limit to determine a strategy for negotiations.

So after reading that, I was reminded of eBay, where I often put in a maximum price and have never felt cheated. I figured that I would go ahead and give them some latitude, and instead of the minimum bid of $500, I went ahead and upped their limit to $1,000. This was because I trusted them to do the right thing.

Now, according to Sedo’s Domain Brokerage Service Terms and Conditions, the first step after acceptance into the brokerage program was as follows:

2.1.2.3. Assignment of Domain Broker

Upon the successful application to the Buyer Brokerage Service, you will be assigned a domain broker in accordance with the approximate value of the domain you wish to acquire. Your domain broker will then seek to establish contact with you through the contact information you have provided in your Sedo user account and shall explain the domain brokerage process and a schedule for providing updates on the course of negotiation.

So our expectation was that, within a couple of days, we’d have a little e-mail or phone chat with the person who was going to be “negotiating” on our behalf, after which time that person would begin to attempt contact with the domain owner to open a dialog and see if we could acquire the domain.

Imagine our surprise when the very first response we received after our automated sign up e-mails was as follows (personal information hidden, obviously):

—————————————-
From: XXXXX XXXXX
Date: Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Subject: Brokerage request for XXXXXXXXXXX.com
To: XXXXX XXXXX

Hello,

A client of mine is interested in this domain and is prepared to offer you $1,000 for it.

Please let me know if you would like to accept their offer.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to your response.

To reply to this message please visit the Brokerage Status page: https://www.sedo.com/member/brokerage/status.php?XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Best regards,

XXXXX XXXXX
Domain Broker
–
Sedo.com, LLC
tel +1 ( 617) 499 – XXXX • fax +1 ( 617) 499 – XXXX
http://www.sedo.com • mailto:XXXXXXXXXX@sedo.com
—————————————-

Now, I don’t know how that strikes you, but even if we forgive the fact that our “broker” skipped the formality of getting in contact with us and setting our expectations, I still see two glaring issues:

1. He sent the e-mail to us, not the domain owner. Presumably this was just an error (a really, really bad one).
2. There was absolutely no “negotiation” taking place on our behalf. Despite the promise to, “…begin negotiations at a fraction of your investment limit….”

I mean, why in the world would we “Hire an experienced Sedo broker to negotiate an acquisition…“, if all that really means is “we’ll send an e-mail on your behalf with your maximum offer to the domain owner”?

Keep in mind that they charged us $69.00 the minute they accepted us as clients, and that there was going to be a 10% commission fee on the final negotiated price.

Now if that commission fee bothers you, as it did me initially, remember the previous promises they made. And remember that this is a large, well known domain registrar. Besides all of that, as far as I’m concerned, the terms I agreed to with Sedo created a Fiduciary Responsibility on their part. What is that?

In a fiduciary relation one person justifiably reposes confidence, good faith, reliance and trust in another whose aid, advice or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relation good conscience requires one to act at all times for the sole benefit and interests of another, with loyalty to those interests.

Now the question is, what should I do about this entire affair? Feel free to share your opinions, and I’ll follow up with another post later as the story unfolds…

None Found

My father forwarded this message to me via e-mail from a friend of his (not sure of the origin). I’m not taking sides here, but I think it’s interesting enough that it deserves examination. Would love to hear opinions on this before I share my own.

Henry Markopolos (JP Edit: actually Harry Markopolous… but it’s OK), the man who waged a decade-long campaign to warn regulators about the operations of money manager Bernard Madoff, told a congressional panel yesterday that the Securities and Exchange Commission (a government agency with nearly 3,800 employees and a salary budget of $620 million taxpayer dollars) is incompetent and that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the securities industry’s own policing organization, is corrupt.

Markopolos said the SEC is “captive to the industry it regulates and is afraid to bring big cases against prominent individuals.” He also said that “the SEC was never capable of catching Mr. Madoff. He (Madoff) could have scammed up to $100 billion” if he chose.

The SEC “roars like a lion and bites like a flea” and “is busy protecting the big financial predators from investors,” Markopolis told the panel.

While the SEC is incompetent, the securities industry’s self-policing organization, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (with nearly 3,000 employees and an annual budget of $500 million dollars), is “very corrupt,” Markopolos testified.

In 2008 the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority levied fines against financial firms totaling $40 million. 2008 was the third straight annual decline in fines levied by the authority. The total was 73% below the $148.5 million in fines collected in 2005.

And who was heading the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority? None other than Mary Schapiro, who is now the head of the Securities and Exchange Commission. She was nominated by President Obama and unanimously confirmed by the Senate.

So the head of a very corrupt authority is now the head of an incompetent authority. Nominated by an inexperienced President and confirmed by an inept Congress. Is it any wonder the economy is in trouble?

Thoughts?

None Found

Folks, I’ve been working on a top secret (not that secret actually) project with Cali Lewis for about a month or two called Wealth Nation Radio.

Wealth Nation is a show about making the most of your personal and professional life, with a particular focus on business and financial issues. It’s not all about money though, it’s about achieving that balance in life which truly makes you feel “wealthy”.

Ultimately, what I believe we’re going to do is record the podcasts on a certain fixed day and time of the week (give or take an hour or so) and stream them live so that people who want to watch the unedited, raw, and blooper filled show on video can do so. But for the rest of you, we’re going to have the audio only podcast available for subscription on iTunes.

Of course, we’re also going to have an RSS feed on our Web site WealthNation.FM (get it? Like an FM radio…), which is heavily under construction at the moment, and we’ll have Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and all those other social media things to share with you guys soon too.

By the way, the format of the show will be to address a common theme at the beginning and then take callers live for questions for the second half of the show and try to help people with real personal, professional and business issues. So if you have a topic you’d like to see us address, send it to any of us and we’ll add it to the list. (Or drop a comment below.)

I haven’t decided yet, but I’m thinking that I’ll likely cross post the podcasts here on my blog each week, so the folks who are looking for all my miscellaneous junk can follow along. Or maybe I’ll embed the live videos here, and let you grab the audio feed if you want from iTunes. A little feedback about what you guys would like to see would be helpful here.

The following video is basically the second half of a show we recorded yesterday. We were well into the Q&A section…

I’m hoping that you guys like the concept. Please share your honest feedback.

None Found

This is a fascinating report from Megan Davies and Walden Siew of Reuter’s. Thanks to Jacques Snyman for sharing the link over on Facebook.

45 percent of world’s wealth destroyed: Blackstone CEO

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Private equity company Blackstone Group LP (BX.N) CEO Stephen Schwarzman said on Tuesday that up to 45 percent of the world’s wealth has been destroyed by the global credit crisis.

“Between 40 and 45 percent of the world’s wealth has been destroyed in little less than a year and a half,” Schwarzman told an audience at the Japan Society. “This is absolutely unprecedented in our lifetime.”

So, if your 401k is suffering, well… join the club! The whole world is in this one together, and that means we all have to get together and work our way out if it.

He put part of the blame for the financial crisis to credit rating agencies.

“What’s pretty clear is that, if you were looking for one culprit out of the many, many, many culprits, you have to point your finger at the rating agencies,” he said.

Rating companies have been the focus of intense criticism for their role in granting top “AAA” ratings for complex bonds that later plummeted in value, resulting in subsequent rating cuts, in many cases to junk status.

“Once you bought into … the Triple A paper and it turned out to be paper that was in many situations going to end up defaulting, then you really had the makings of a global problem,” he said.

Let me tell you what is going to change the game in my opinion. Technological innovation.

Right now, what we need are some new and exciting disruptive technologies to get people fired up again. Everyone is going to keep hoarding and scrimping and saving until something comes along that they figure delivers so much value that they just can’t live without it!

What could that be? Well:

• New medical technologies that extend life, cure diseases, or improve our physical health. Can anyone say Bio tech investment?
• New battery and other storage devices. We already know how to make all the energy we need. The problem is, we can’t store it for long at all.
• New transportation infrastructure. I’m tired of building and maintaining roads! And smelling car fumes! How about futuristic electric powered hover-cars!

Bottom line people… wishing about changing the world isn’t going to make it happen! We have to ALL get off our asses and work our way out of it. So quit complaining and start innovating a way out of this mess and we’ll all be just fine.

None Found

So what have we learned in two millennia?

“The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”

– Cicero – 55 BC

…Evidently nothing.

None Found

Mark Cuban pitched an idea over on his blog in which he offers to fund business plans for people, but only if:

• People completely detail out their business plan in public.
• The businesses must show a profit within 90 days.
• You use the bank of Mark’s choice and allow him control over expenditures.

Unfortunately, I believe Mark is off base with this concept, and left the following comment over there on his blog. I doubt he’ll respond, but he did at least get people talking – even though he might have done more harm than good.

Mark,

I’ve been reading your blog for quite a while. Never left a comment before. Decided now was the time.

First of all, let’s be clear about one thing. I don’t want your money. Won’t take it if you offer it just on principle of being entirely candid. Now that that’s out of the way.

I’m not sure I understand your impetus for putting this “offer” out there? Trying to figure out if it is a publicity stunt, a VC pitch in disguise, an “off the top of your head” idea, or what? But I fail to see how asking all of these people to pitch an idea in the open and asking them to “open source” the project adds value?

You are asking people, in essence, to forego first mover advantage on any sort of good idea. You are asking them to forego the ability to get patent protection, copyright, or any other sort of valuable intellectual property. This will only serve to weaken fledgling businesses – not help them get launched.

In addition to that, you’ve placed restrictions on cash flow and profitability that will have the exact opposite effect on employment as you purport to be seeking. Anyone looking to hire employees can barely get them up to speed in 60 days much less have the business break even. This means you are pretty much limiting the opportunities to one man shows in fields that have extremely low barriers to entry.

I would suggest that if you wish you really help fund businesses and put people to work you should change your parameters.

- Allow 6 months to reach break even, 9 to turn a profit.
- Ensure that the plan requires the business to actually hire a minimum number of employees (like 3-4).
- Remove the restriction on generating “any” ad revenue in lieu of ad revenue being only a secondary source (if a business can be profitable without ads, why not allow ads as a bonus?)
- Ease up on the cash flow and banking restrictions. You can’t tell people that you won’t be available, but that you have to approve of monetary decisions. You’ll stifle the business.
- And for God’s sake, don’t require them to publish the entire plan in the open and encourage stealing of the idea!

I know that you said that you are “trying not to be a VC”, but frankly these “terms” are worse than any VC terms I’ve ever seen. They are unrealistic when it comes to creating real employment, they are more restrictive than necessary, and they just aren’t going to work.

How about doing something completely different? Why don’t you buy a small building which can be partitioned into “open source office space” and give small businesses a free place to actually get together, work and share ideas. Augment this by inviting successful business people to come in and help with brainstorming sessions, etc. And perhaps organize a group of Angel investors to listen to real business plans. (I’d help, and even consider Angel investing if you did this.)

In short, I’m a fan of the Open Source model. But I think the way you’ve gone about open sourcing this particular concept is a bit off.

Cheers, and good luck!

John P.

Of course, Mark is as free to do with his money as the rest of us are. But I hope that he changes his mind about this particular project because I don’t see anything good coming of it.

None Found

Leave it to the Brits to properly report on US news. According to the Independant, California will run out of money in February.

The State of California will run out of money within two months, forcing Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to start settling bills and paying employees by issuing “IOU” notes, his chief financial officer has revealed….

Unless taxes can be raised, or spending reined in, millions of public-sector employees and private contractors face having their salaries paid in “registered warrants,” a piece of paper which the Governor will promise to exchange for cash as soon as he is able.

The effective bankruptcy of an entire state is unprecedented in American history, even during the Great Depression. Yet despite California’s standing as one of the most prosperous regions of the wealthiest nation on earth, its Governor seems powerless to stave off disaster.

So-called “direct democracy,” through which small interest groups can enact laws by making them the subject of an electoral “proposition” or ballot measure that attracts more than 50 per cent of the vote, has severely limited his ability to manage finances.

Property taxes, the mainstay of any state’s income, have been frozen for many homeowners since a proposition was passed in the late 1970s. A separate measure, introduced in the 1980s, means that income taxes cannot be raised without the agreement of two-thirds of the state’s lawmakers.

Meanwhile, a raft of other ballot measures control spending, meaning that only 25 per cent of California’s spending is considered “discretionary”. The rest has been “earmarked” for a particular cause or project….

So to summarize:

• The state is OUT of money.
• They are not allowed to raise income taxes.
• They are not allowed to raise property taxes.
• No one is willing to stop spending!

Well, I guess we’re all about to learn what happens when a state goes bankrupt! As if we couldn’t already learn that from the History channel when every major global power eventually gave up the ghost because they were broke.

California is about to lose it’s place as one of the world’s great super-states. Yee-haw for Texas!

None Found

Well, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics published their unemployment news yesterday, and it was nothing to smile about.

November 2008 US Unemployment Rate

Nonfarm payroll employment fell sharply (-533,000) in November, and the unemployment rate rose from 6.5 to 6.7 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. November’s drop in payroll employment followed declines of 403,000 in September and 320,000 in October, as revised. Job losses were large and widespread across the major industry sectors in November.

Oh, and by the way, these numbers only count the people who are actively looking for a job. An additional 422,000 people exited the work force for any number of reasons — they went back to school, retired or simply abandoned job searches out of sheer frustration.

Here is a link to the government’s full report in PDF or HTML if you are interested.

Where did all those jobs go? Well, we hear about a lot of the high profile losses:

• Citigroup’s 52,000 layoffs will impact IT
• Circuit City to Close 155 Stores, Lay Off Thousands
• 1,300 from Fidelity Investments
• 1,000 from toy maker Mattel
• 2,600 at Ford
• 850 from La-Z-Boy

But the reality is that the majority of the losses come from smaller companies who still make up the greatest number of people in the workforce. If the entire economy is hurting, a few jobs from each company adds up quick.

According to an Associated Press article:

President-elect Barack Obama said the crisis “is likely to get worse before it gets better,” and no one was going to argue that point. Economists predicted the unemployment rate, which rose to a 15-year high of 6.7 percent in November, could soar as high as 10 percent before skittish employers begin hiring again….

Employment shrank in virtually every part of the economy — factories, construction companies, financial firms, accounting and bookkeeping, architectural and engineering firms, hotels and motels, food services, retailers, temporary help, transportation, publishing, janitorial and building maintenance, and even waste management. The few fields spared included education, health care and government.

The United States — already in recession for a year, may not be out of it until the spring of 2010 — making for the longest downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s, economists are now saying. Recessions in the mid-1970s and early 1980s last 16 months.

Unemployment peaked at 10.8 percent in 1982, terrible but still a far cry from the Depression, when roughly one in four Americans were out of work.

What does all of this mean? Well, if you’ve got a job – work hard and do everything you can to make your company one of the survivors so you can keep it!

None Found

I told you guys we were in a recession back in March, but now I fear we could move from a recession straight into a depression. Things could get really bad… Let’s examine shall we?

In economics, a depression is a sustained, long downturn in one or more economies. It is more severe than a recession, which is seen as a normal downturn in the business cycle. The mother of all modern depressions was of course the “Great Depression”:

The Great Depression was a worldwide economic downturn starting in most places in 1929 and ending at different times in the 1930s or early 1940s for different countries. It was the largest and most important economic depression in modern history, and is used in the 21st century as a benchmark in how far the world’s economy can fall. The Great Depression originated in the United States; historians most often use as a starting date the stock market crash on October 29, 1929, known as Black Tuesday. The end of the depression in the U.S. is associated with the onset of the war economy of World War II, beginning around 1939.

The depression had devastating effects in the developed and developing worlds. International trade was deeply affected, as were personal incomes, tax revenues, prices, and profits. Cities all around the world were hit hard, especially those dependent on heavy industry. Construction was virtually halted in many countries. Farming and rural areas suffered as crop prices fell by 40 to 60 percent. Facing plummeting demand with few alternate sources of jobs, areas dependent on primary sector industries such as farming, mining and logging suffered the most.

The majority of countries set up relief programs, and most underwent some sort of political upheaval, pushing them to the left or right. In some states, the desperate citizens turned toward nationalist demagogues – the most infamous being Adolf Hitler – setting the stage for World War II in 1939.

Here is a video outlining what happened that fateful day, which would take 15 years for the US to climb out of:

But to really examine this topic, we should go back a little further in time. How about 1837?

The Panic of 1837 was a panic in the United States built on a speculative fever. The bubble burst on May 10, 1837 in New York City, when every bank stopped payment in specie (gold and silver coinage). The Panic was followed by a five-year depression, with the failure of banks and record high unemployment levels.

A larger catalyst came in the form of the Bank of England. The Bank of England was not comfortable with the increased flow of funds into U.S. by British investors. To combat this negative flow of funds, the bank increased its deposit rate. The increase in the deposit rate made it more attractive for British investors to invest within the UK, thus pulling funds from the U.S. As with any “credit” bubble, once the available credit shrinks, the “crash” quickly ensues.

But wait, there’s more! As history so often repeats it’s self, the panic of 1837 was followed by the Panic of 1893.

The Panic of 1893 was a serious economic depression in the United States that was an extension of the Panic of 1873, and like that earlier crash, was caused by railroad overbuilding and shaky railroad financing which set off a series of bank failures. The Panic of 1893 was the worst economic crisis to hit the nation in its history to that point.

The 1880s had seen a period of remarkable economic expansion in the United States. In time, the expansion became driven by speculation, much like the “tech bubble” of the late 1990s, except that the preferred industry was railroads. Railroads were vastly over-built, and many companies tried to take over many others, seriously endangering their own stability.

As concern of the state of the economy worsened, people rushed to withdraw their money from banks and caused bank runs. The credit crunch rippled through the economy. European investors only took payment in gold, depleting US gold reserves, and threatening the US dollar’s value which was backed by gold. The investments during the time of the Panic were heavily financed through bond issues with high interest payments. As the demand for Silver and Silver notes fell, its price and value dropped. Holders worried about a loss of face value of bonds, and many became worthless.

A series of bank failures followed, and the price of silver fell. The Northern Pacific Railway, the Union Pacific Railroad and the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad all failed. This was followed by the bankruptcy of many other companies; in total over 15,000 companies and 500 banks failed (many in the west). About 17%-19% of the workforce was unemployed at the Panic’s peak. The huge spike in unemployment, combined with the loss of life savings by failed banks, meant that a once secure middle class could not meet their mortgage obligations. As a result, many walked away from recently built homes. From this, the sight of the vacant Victorian (haunted) house entered the American mindset.

There have been other crisis as well. 1873, 1907, but this one is shaping up to be one for the record books. (Thanks to StockCharts.com for this graph by the way.)

So, since everyone is comparing our current predicament to The Great Depression (pf 1929), one thing to keep in mind is that the market took 7 years to return to half it’s 1929 value, and 25 years to return to completely recover. So all I can tell you guys is that it’s time to be very conservative and careful right about now. We could be in for a long, long ride.

But wait – you say! Hold everything! Why the heck am I so pessimistic all of a sudden? Well, I’d argue that it’s not all that sudden, but anyway… let me tell you.

• Consumer prices in October took their biggest monthly plunge in the six decades that records have been kept. A prolonged, widespread decline would do serious economic damage, dragging down incomes, clobbering home prices even more and shrinking corporate profits.
  
  
• The Dow closed under 8,000 yesterday, at 7,997 – its lowest close since March 2003. The financial crisis has already wiped out $6.7 trillion of value from the S&P 500 since its October 2007 high. In the same period, the Dow has lost more than 6,000 points.
• Oct. 29, the Fed lowered the benchmark interest rate to 1 percent, a level seen once before in the past half-century. The Fed was worried about the effectiveness of previous rate cuts and had doubts about whether more cuts would help much.
• Americans have cut back sharply on spending amid mounting strains from job losses, shrinking nest eggs and falling home prices. More economic contraction in this quarter would meet the classic definition of a recession – two straight quarters of negative growth.
• Builders slashed home construction by 4.5 percent last month, driving it down to the lowest level on records dating to 1959.
• New claims for unemployment benefits jumped last week to a 16-year high. The four-week average of claims, which smooths out fluctuations, was even worse: it rose to 506,500, the highest in more than 25 years. It’s expected to get even worse next year.
• All three of the big US automakers are threatening bankruptcy and seeking $25B in bail out money from the government, which is looking shaky. They claim failure would cost 3 million jobs, though some people claim it wouldn’t be so bad.
  

Even with the S&P down more than 70% from its peak, the entire sector still has more pain ahead, says John Roque, of Natixis Bleichroeder, based on the historical peak-to-trough declines of past market manias, including:

• Dutch Tulip Mania (1637): 90% peak-to trough decline
• South Sea Co. (1720): 90% peak-to trough decline
• Tokyo Real Estate (1989): 84% peak-to trough decline
• U.S. dotcoms (2000): 92% peak-to trough decline

Part of the problem with the markets is that no one can predict what is going to ultimately help take us out of this recession. Is it going to be investment in alternative energies? Is someone going to invent a new world changing widget? What’s it going to take? I mean, until something comes along that makes everyone want to invest in it, we’re going to be stagnant at best.

Anyone care to take a guess at where all of this is going?

None Found

Ok. So, a good executive can be worth a lot of money to a company. I don’t have anything against a nice pay package, all things considered. But it is literally criminal for an Executive to receive a huge payout when they deliver negative results for a company. In my opinion, Exec pay should be merit based. If the exec delivers outstanding shareholder value, a big paycheck should ensue.

So, how then about these execs? Just 72 hours before the company filed for bankrupcy, Lehman awarded the top 5 executives $100 million. Yep. You heard that right. They drove the company into the ground and got rich off of doing it.

THE Lehman Brothers board signed off on more than $100m (£59m) in payouts to five top executives just three days before the bank went bankrupt leaving thousands of employees out of work in London.

The payoffs, approved on September 12 by the Wall Street giant’s compensation committee, included over $24m in severance packages to the collapsed firm’s top three London executives.

The committee agreed a $16.2m pay-off for Benoit Savoret, chief operating officer for Europe. This payment had been guaranteed by the firm after Savoret had turned down an approach to join a rival firm. Andy Morton, the fixed-income business head, was set for a $2m golden goodbye.

Both were forced out in a shake-up orchestrated from New York in the waning days at the troubled bank. A $5m package for Jeremy Isaacs, the European chief executive who also left, was approved as well.

The executives never received the payments – detailed in internal Lehman documents seen by The Sunday Times – because the company filed for bankruptcy protection the next working day, September 15.

According to Tony Lomas, the lead administrator, they will now be treated as unsecured creditors.

The committee also signed a $41m retention package for Eric Felder, the head of global fixed income in New York, and a $40m two-year deal for Jerry Donini, the US-based head of equities. These are understood to have been voided, replaced by new contracts under Barclays which bought the US business.

The pay deals will further inflame the debate raging about executive pay as the global financial crisis accelerates.

Read the rest here.

None Found

Wow! The New York Times hit a home run today with this editorial column from Warren Buffett. So, for all of you guys who are feeling scared and wondering what to do with the economy in the toilet right now, you might want to listen to one of the richest men ever to walk the planet.

Buy American. I Am.

By WARREN E. BUFFETT

THE financial world is a mess, both in the United States and abroad. Its problems, moreover, have been leaking into the general economy, and the leaks are now turning into a gusher. In the near term, unemployment will rise, business activity will falter and headlines will continue to be scary.

So … I’ve been buying American stocks. This is my personal account I’m talking about, in which I previously owned nothing but United States government bonds. (This description leaves aside my Berkshire Hathaway holdings, which are all committed to philanthropy.) If prices keep looking attractive, my non-Berkshire net worth will soon be 100 percent in United States equities.

Why?

A simple rule dictates my buying: Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful. And most certainly, fear is now widespread, gripping even seasoned investors. To be sure, investors are right to be wary of highly leveraged entities or businesses in weak competitive positions. But fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the nation’s many sound companies make no sense. These businesses will indeed suffer earnings hiccups, as they always have. But most major companies will be setting new profit records 5, 10 and 20 years from now.

Let me be clear on one point: I can’t predict the short-term movements of the stock market. I haven’t the faintest idea as to whether stocks will be higher or lower a month — or a year — from now. What is likely, however, is that the market will move higher, perhaps substantially so, well before either sentiment or the economy turns up. So if you wait for the robins, spring will be over.

A little history here: During the Depression, the Dow hit its low, 41, on July 8, 1932. Economic conditions, though, kept deteriorating until Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in March 1933. By that time, the market had already advanced 30 percent. Or think back to the early days of World War II, when things were going badly for the United States in Europe and the Pacific. The market hit bottom in April 1942, well before Allied fortunes turned. Again, in the early 1980s, the time to buy stocks was when inflation raged and the economy was in the tank. In short, bad news is an investor’s best friend. It lets you buy a slice of America’s future at a marked-down price.

Over the long term, the stock market news will be good. In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497.

You might think it would have been impossible for an investor to lose money during a century marked by such an extraordinary gain. But some investors did. The hapless ones bought stocks only when they felt comfort in doing so and then proceeded to sell when the headlines made them queasy.

Today people who hold cash equivalents feel comfortable. They shouldn’t. They have opted for a terrible long-term asset, one that pays virtually nothing and is certain to depreciate in value. Indeed, the policies that government will follow in its efforts to alleviate the current crisis will probably prove inflationary and therefore accelerate declines in the real value of cash accounts.

Equities will almost certainly outperform cash over the next decade, probably by a substantial degree. Those investors who cling now to cash are betting they can efficiently time their move away from it later. In waiting for the comfort of good news, they are ignoring Wayne Gretzky’s advice: “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been.”

I don’t like to opine on the stock market, and again I emphasize that I have no idea what the market will do in the short term. Nevertheless, I’ll follow the lead of a restaurant that opened in an empty bank building and then advertised: “Put your mouth where your money was.” Today my money and my mouth both say equities.

Warren E. Buffett is the chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway, a diversified holding company.

None Found

So, you need a Web site developed, you’re looking for a new logo, or you’ve got a business application you need created. OR, you would like to be developing Websites, logos and apps for other people! But you don’t have a clue how to go about matching yourself up with someone who can fulfill your needs?

Don’t worry, I hear this a lot. My recommendation is to create a simple description of the type of work you are looking for, and post it on one of the many freelance developer sites that have sprung up online. I’ve actually used a couple of these myself, and have been impressed with the quality of work that I’ve managed to get done.

So whether you’re looking to get hired or hire someone else, here are 8 sites you should definitely check out:

• Elance.com – One of the largest freelance sites around. Membership accounts range from FREE to $39.95/month for large businesses. Elance charges a service fee of between 6.75 % – 8.75 % for paid jobs.
• RentACoder.com – Claims to have over 200,000 registered members, and over 2,500 active jobs (as of the day I published this).
• GetACoder.com – Large list of jobs available with commissions comparable to the other services listed here.
• GetAFreelancer.com – Most projects seem to range from $500-$1,000, with the company charging a commission for paid jobs.
• Guru.com – Claims to be the largest freelance site out there. Guru offers FREE, as well as paid, memberships that range from $29.95 to $99.95 per quarter. Guru takes 5 % – 10 % commission.
• ScriptLance.com – ScriptLance is FREE but charges 5% commission.
• iFreelance – Membership levels vary between $4 – $7/month but that is all you pay. iFreelance doesn’t charge a commission.
• ProBlogger’s Job Board – pretty much nothing but jobs for writers or bloggers.

None Found