Author: Serkadis

Democratic Senate leaders are trying to consolidate support within their own caucus.

The Wall Street Journal reports on Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who says she generally supports the health overhaul efforts, but would like to see more items like higher federal Medicaid payments for her state, increased coverage for foster children and more help for teaching hospitals in Louisiana before she commits to voting for the bill — all while insisting Democrats lower the cost of the bill. “As Democratic leaders enter the intensive phase of their drive to pass health legislation, they must satisfy 60 Mary Landrieus in the Senate — every Democrat and the two Democratic-friendly independents, each with individual priorities — as they try to hold together a fragile coalition with no room for error.” Others like Landrieu include Sens. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark.; and Bob Menendez, D-N.J. (Bendavid, 11/6).

CongressDaily reports that some Democrats also still have concerns over allowing states to opt out of the government-run public option for health insurance. “Some Democrats wary that the opt-out will effectively become a national public option are pushing for Reid to consider an alternative, such as the so-called trigger backed by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. (Landrieu) and Ben Nelson, D-Neb., who have not committed to vote for cloture and end debate on the healthcare bill, still hope to convince Reid to reconsider inclusion of the opt-out in the bill he takes to the floor” (Friedman, 11/6).

Finally, Roll Call reports that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid met with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel late Wednesday “to discuss how to get a health care reform bill through his chamber by year’s end, according to Democratic sources.” (Drucker, 11/5).

Doctors and hospital payment systems remain at the center of the health care reform debate as news outlets examine the benefits of replacing the current fee-for-service approach.The New York Times Prescription Blog reports: “In The New York Times Magazine on Sunday, economics columnist David Leonhardt poses one of the more disturbing questions of the health care debate: If politicians cannot fix America’s fragmented, ailing health care system, who will? Physicians have reshaped medicine in the past, Mr. Leonhardt argues, and a few – like Dr. Brent James, chief quality officer of Intermountain Healthcare in Salt Lake City – already are leading the way to the future” (11/4).

The blog also provides a link to the full New York Times magazine article, which notes: “The health care debate of 2009 has had so many moving parts that it has sometimes seemed impossible to follow. The crisis behind the debate, though, is about one thing above all: the scattershot nature of American medicine. The fee-for-service payment system — combined with our own instincts as patients — encourages ever more testing and treatments. We’re not sure which ones make a difference, but we keep on getting them, and costs keep rising.” The article notes that these problems aren’t likely to be fixed this year as a result of Congress’ overhaul efforts. “And yet the modern history of medicine …  offers reason for optimism. Medicine has changed before, after all. When it did, government policy played a role. But much of the impetus came from inside the profession” (Leonhardt, 11/3).

NPR reports on doctors’ payments and the rising health care costs from the 1960s to the present. It also examines the reimbursement system created in the late 1980s when “an economist from Harvard, Professor William Hsiao, finally came up with method to determine competitive prices for doctor’s care. Hsiao brought in doctors and asked them to rate every single thing they did based on how technically hard it was, how stressful, how much the supplies cost, etc. From this data, he developed the relative value scale. Medicare adopted the relative value scale in 1992, and it’s still used today” (11/4).

Reuters reports on doctors’ role in health care problems and the often irrational distribution of doctors as seen through healthcare data analyzed by Dartmouth Medical School. Reuters reports: “Access to top doctors, cutting-edge procedures and advanced life-saving technology has less to do with need and more to do with quality of life issues that any professional would consider when deciding where to live — climate, schools, and perhaps most importantly, income” (Baltimore, 11/5).

Yahoo has officially shut down Geocities.The company has said that it did not count the property among its priorities, so it is simply getting rid of it. Yahoo has shut down about 20 services in less than a year.

We learned that Yahoo would be closing the door on GeoCities back in April, so users have had plenty of time to migrate to other services. Earlier this year, for example, MSN partnered with WetPaint  to allow people to create "fansites". After Yahoo’s announcement, Wetpaint took the opportunity to announce a "bailout plan for foreclosed GeoCities properties," which it called the "GeoCities Asset Recovery Plan (GARP)."As it shuts down GeoCities, Yahoo itself is now plugging its own $4.99-a-month Web hosting service.

Ok, so there are other options for GeoCities users, but is just shutting down a community that still attracts so much traffic the right thing to do?  Yahoo’s way of going about it has been widely questioned. According to Compete data, GeoCities has still been seeing over 10 million unique monthly visitors as recently as last month. Why would Yahoo want to just shut that down?

"Then there’s the fact that Google, not Yahoo, appears to be responsible for the lion’s share of GeoCities referrals, sending about 31.45 percent of the site’s traffic its way," noted Doug Caverly upon Yahoo’s original announcement. "Yahoo’s only behind of 16.89 percent of all GeoCities visits. So by closing GeoCities, for which it paid $3.6 billion in 1999, Yahoo seems to be turning its back on a large amount of traffic.  Moreover, it’s turning down free traffic from its biggest competitor." 

"Carol Bartz may be trying to get Yahoo’s costs under control, but it looks like sticking a ‘for sale’ sign on GeoCities would be at least one preferable option compared to a closure," he added.

But alas, it looks like the sign reads "closed" rather than "for sale." So say goodbye, and in the words of Richard Marxx, "hold on to the memory."

It seems unwise from a business perspective, but what about the users? Does Yahoo have an obligation to its users who may have spent years using their GeoCities site only to have it pulled from the web? Should Yahoo provide a forwarding web address for GeoCities users? After all, it was the GeoCities users that built their sites, promoted them and put up with sometimes annoying ads. A simple forwarding of their GeoCities url to their new home would be appreciated! Do you agree?

MySpace isn’t exactly at the peak of its popularity, but there are still tons of people who use it. What if they just pulled everything? What if Google bought Facebook and decided to kill it? What if your Tweets vanished? Sure these things seem unlikely now because these services are still fresh. Well, GeoCities was once the "it" thing too. Granted, most GeoCities sites I have seen are not much to look at now, but that doesn’t mean people aren’t getting use out of them. They’re obviously getting page views.

Here’s what Yahoo is telling GeoCities users to do if they want to keep their sites:

On October 26, 2009, your GeoCities site will no longer appear on the Web, and you will no longer be able to access your GeoCities account and files. If you’d like to keep your web site, you’ll need to move your site files to another web hosting provider.

We recommend moving to our award-winning Web Hosting service, which works a lot like GeoCities but includes a personalized domain name (such as widgetdesigns.com) and matching email, terrific new site building tools, unlimited disk space and bandwidth, premium customer support, and more.

Perhaps it’s not worth it to users to go throgh the hassle of migration, but it has been nice to have their GeoCities site at least remain in tact. Well, tough luck. I hope you’ve gotten what you wanted away from it before Yahoo obliterates it. There are some sites out there that have not yet been shut down, but it appears that is only a matter of time.

What do you think of Yahoo’s decision to simply shut down GeoCities? Discuss here.

Remembering GeoCities

GeoCities held a lot of web memories for a lot of people. There was a time where you could barely surf the web without running into one GeoCities site or another. Wikipedia provides a little history:

GeoCities began in mid-1995 as BHI, which stood for Beverly Hills Internet, a small Web hosting and development company in Southern California.

The company created its own Web directory, organized thematically in six "neighborhoods". The neighborhood included "Colosseum," "Hollywood," "RodeoDrive," "SunsetStrip," "WallStreet," and "WestHollywood". In mid-1995, the company decided to offer users (thereafter known as "Homesteaders") the ability to develop free home pages within those neighborhoods. Chat, bulletin boards, and other elements of "community" were added soon after, helping foster rapid growth. On July 5, 1995 Geocities added additional cities, including "CapitolHill," "Paris," "SiliconValley," and "Tokyo." By December 1995, the company, which now had a total of 14 neighborhoods, was signing up thousands of Homesteaders a day and getting over six million monthly page views. The company decided to focus on building membership and community, and on December 15, 1995, BHI became known as GeoCities after having also been called Geopages.

"It was perhaps the first mainstream example of an open, participatory and personal Internet," writes Mark Milian with the LA Times.

In early 1999, Yahoo purchased Geocities for about $3.57 billion in stock. Now a decade later, Geocities is no more.

Do you have fond memories of the Geocities days? Should Yahoo be obligated to forward GeoCities pages to your new site? What if Facebook, MySpace or Twitter suddenly shut down? Should there be a web or social homesteading bill of rights?

>>> Share your thoughts below …

 

Related Articles:

>GeoCities Users Get a Bailout From Wetpaint

>Yahoo Failing To Consider GeoCities Alternatives?

>Yahoo Turning Lights Out At GeoCities

>Ballmer Talks About Yahoo and GeoCities

>Should You Stop Blogging?

Senators introduced legislation Thursday to extend COBRA to help unemployed workers and their families with health coverage. WKYC-TV, a NBC affiliate in Ohio, reports. “U.S. Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Robert P. Casey (D-PA) introduced a bill Thursday to extend the ‘COBRA’ subsidy which helps unemployed workers and their families afford temporary health care [coverage]. The bill would extend and expand the COBRA subsidy included in the Recovery Act, a subsidy that is set to expire Dec. 1 unless Congress acts to renew it. The bill is also co-sponsored by Sen. Al Franken (D-MN).”

“The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA) established a nine-month subsidy to help unemployed workers purchase temporary COBRA coverage for themselves and their families. The original COBRA subsidy included in the Recovery Act was based in part on Brown’s Coverage Continuity Act (S.29) which he introduced in January, 2009. The provision in ARRA established a nine-month subsidy to help laid-off workers purchase COBRA coverage — with the federal government covering 65 percent of the health premium. The goals of this legislation were to ensure coverage continuity and prevent a spike in Medicaid enrollment” (Wendel, 11/5).

WHTM-TV, an ABC News affiliate in Pennsylvania, reports that the bill would “extend the subsidy an extra six months to 15 months. It would additionally increase the subsidy amount from 65 percent to 75 percent of the workers’ premiums.The extension would also expand eligibility to include workers who lose their employer-sponsored health benefits because of a reduction in working hours. Currently, only laid-off workers are eligible for the subsidy” (11/5).

Related KHN story: End of COBRA Subsidy Rattles The Newly Unemployed (Schmitt, 10/28).

The Hill reports that the “illegal immigration issue is emerging as the biggest threat to passing healthcare reform in the House.” Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus are upset with a last-minute threat to “bolster the House bill’s immigration restrictions to match those included in the Senate Finance bill.” The restrictions include a provision preventing illegal immigrants from accessing the health insurance ‘exchange,’ even if they were to pay for the coverage out of their own pocket.

“On Thursday afternoon, four leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) traveled to the White House to meet with Obama on behalf of the entire group.” Illegal immigrants are already barred by language in the bill from enrolling in the public option or receiving subsidies from the government to purchase coverage. The Hill reports that the meeting was billed as an opportunity for Caucus representatives “to talk to the President about healthcare,” but the underlying message was clear: “Drop your insistence on preventing illegal immigrants from accessing the public exchange…”  (Allen, 11/5).

CongressDaily: “House leaders are likely to bow to pressure from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and leave tighter restrictions for undocumented immigrants out of the health care overhaul, but avoiding conflict in the House could set up a brutal battle with the Senate and possibly President Obama” (Hunt, 11/6).

Roll Call: The other hot-button issue in the House, abortion’s treatment in the bill, has not yet been finalized, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday. “‘We may not have any amendments,’ she said. However, the Speaker clarified later that Republicans would be given an opportunity to offer their 219-page alternative bill” (Dennis, 11/5).

Initial sales of Microsoft’s Windows 7 software outperformed those of Vista’s first few days on the U.S. market, according to the latest analysis from The NPD Group.

Windows 7 software unit sales in the U.S. were 234 percent higher than Vista’s first few days of sales. A combination of early discounts on pre-sales and a lack of promotional activity for the Ultimate version resulted in dollar sales that were 82 percent higher than Vista.

"Microsoft’s program of early low-cost pre-sales, high visibility marketing, and aggressive deals helped make the Windows 7 software launch successful," said Stephen Baker, vice president of industry analysis at NPD.

"In a slow environment for packaged software Windows 7 brought a large number of customers into the software aisles."

While boxed software sales were up compared to the Vista launch, PC hardware sales ran into more of a challenge. PC sales growth was higher than any week during the high volume back-to-school third quarter, but wasn’t as strong as growth during the Vista launch.

PC sales growth during the Vista launch was stronger, increasing 68 percent over the prior year’s sales and 170 percent over the week preceding the launch. Windows PC sales were down 6 percent compared to PC sales during the Vista launch week.

"A combination of factors impacted Windows 7 PC sales at the outset, but the trajectory of overall PC sales is very strong leading into the holiday season," said Baker. 

"Vista had a slight advantage at launch, as January traditionally has a bigger sales footprint than October.  The other hurdle Windows 7 faced was sales of PCs with older operating systems (XP and Vista) were high, making up 20 percent of sales during the Windows 7 launch, compared to just 6 percent of older operating sales during Vista’s launch week."

 

Related Articles:

> What People Are Saying About Microsoft Windows 7

>Only In Japan: Burger King Offers A Windows 7 Whopper

>Microsoft Wants You To Bing Up Your Windows 7

 

 

It looks like some lawyers representing cosmetics giant Mary Kay have removed their figurative war paint.  In early July, Mary Kay sued Yahoo, alleging trademark infringement, but not long ago, Yahoo was able to settle the case.

Mary Kay originally objected to Yahoo’s practice of adding links of its own choosing to certain emails.  The links appeared in popups when people would position their cursors over the text, potentially creating confusion about the extra ads’ origin.

"Emails that advertise Mary Kay products are hijacked and manipulated by Yahoo and provide an unfair advantage for the unauthorized re-sellers and other competitors," claimed Mary Kay’s suit, which was filed in the Northern District of Dallas.

Now – although the terms of the settlement haven’t been disclosed – Yahoo’s presumably apologized, promised to never repeat the offending behavior, and provided at least a little in the way of cash compensation.  Such is the way these things go.

Anyway, a big hat tip also goes to Erik Larson, who noted that this settlement may have some interesting ramifications.  He wrote, "The dispute was similar to trademark lawsuits against Google Inc. in which the world’s most popular search firm was accused of wrongfully selling ad rights to keyword searches."

Related Articles:

> Skype Founders Reportedly Close To Settlement With eBay

> Power.com Suit Against Facebook Tossed

> Turkey Asks Google For $47 Million In Taxes

The Washington Post reports: “Newly emboldened after Republican victories in Tuesday’s elections, ‘tea party’ protesters and other demonstrators from across the country converged on the Capitol’s West Lawn to wave flags, ring cowbells and deliver a blunt message to lawmakers: ‘Kill this bill!’” The demonstrators came from all over the country, answering rallying cries by Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., on conservative talk-radio shows and united by anger about the growing role of the federal government and its deficit (Rucker, 11/6).

Reporting from the scene, The New York Times noted, “It’s a generally older crowd, many in their 50s and 60s, predominantly, white, and many self-identified as Christians. They are fiercely conservative and deeply skeptical of the government, many of them adamantly opposed to abortion rights.” In addition to the shouts to “kill this bill,” protestors bore signs saying “Sweeping Away Socialism One Democrat at a Time” and “Politicians Lie, Patients Die” (Herszenhorn, 11/5).

Most House Republicans appeared on the Capitol Steps overlooking the protesters, The Dallas Morning News reports. They took turns “whipping up the crowd, not that it took much effort.” Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Tex., said, “We heard from you this summer. It was like an inoculation. It was like a vaccination to prevent the illness known as Pelosi-care. … But when we came back in September, that immunity started to wane, and it started to get weak. So this is our booster shot” (Gillman, 11/6).

Some Democrats hope they can quell concerns about the most divisive issues raised by the protesters, such as immigration and abortion concerns, The Boston Globe reports. “Veteran lawmakers said they were confident they could add wording to ease the worries of colleagues and interest groups who believe — Democratic leaders say without justification — that taxpayers will be forced to fund abortions and illegal immigrants’ health care” (Milligan, 11/6). 

Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., the House minority whip, “assured reporters that there were no Republican votes for the Democrats’ health care bill, which is scheduled for a vote on Saturday,” Roll Call reports. The Republican leadership is also actively seeking to gain some Democratic votes in opposition to the reform legislation (Drucker, 11/5).

Meanwhile, “Behind the scenes … lawyers connected with the Tea Party movement are planning a legal assault on healthcare reform,” The Christian Science Monitor reports. The lawyers argue that Congress would be overstepping its authority by requiring Americans to buy health insurance just because they live in the country. They also say tax penalties on people who choose not to buy insurance would violate the 16th Amendment. Many constitutional experts dismiss those arguments (Jonsson, 11/5).

Today’s employment report contained both signs of hope for recovery and painful evidence of continued labor market weakness.

Payroll employment declined 190,000 in October, continuing the steady trend of moderating job loss that began last spring. Furthermore, the employment loss in both August and September was revised down substantially. Importantly, employment in temporary help services, typically one of the first industries to see job gains, increased by 33,700. The motor vehicle industry also posted employment gains. These are hopeful signs that the unprecedented policy actions are working to stabilize the economy and put us on a path toward recovery.

The unemployment rate, however, rose four-tenths of a percentage point, to 10.2 percent. That this occurred despite the rise in real GDP last quarter reflects both the typical lag between GDP growth and unemployment decline, and the recent exceptional increases in productivity. Having the unemployment rate reach double-digits is a stark reminder of how much work remains to be done before American families see the job gains and reduced unemployment that they need and deserve.

 

Christina Romer is Chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers

The Associated Press: “Voting is set for Saturday on the 10-year, $1.2 trillion legislation that embraces Obama’s goals of extending health coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans and putting tough new restrictions on insurance companies.” The points of contention remain abortion and immigration (Werner, 11/6).

The New York Times reports that Democratic vote counters said they don’t have the 218 members needed to pass the bill yet, but that they were confident they would them by the time of the vote. “Some Democrats from more conservative districts, like Representative Ike Skelton of Missouri, Representative Dan Boren of Oklahoma, Representative Jim Marshall of Georgia and Representative Bobby Bright of Alabama, made it clear they would oppose the measure. … Several others, including Representative Jim Cooper of Tennessee and Representative Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania, remained undecided. … ‘They are trying to get you any way they can,’ said Mr. Altmire, who also met for an hour on Thursday with conservative constituents who traveled to Washington to take part in the rally [against the bill]. ‘I am doing the best I can against competing interests.’” (Hulse and Herszenhorn, 11/5).

The Washington Post reports that there are 25 “hard no” Democrat votes. With 258 Democrats in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi can’t lose more than 15 more and still see the bill pass, especially because there is likely to be no Republican support. “For party leaders, setting a weekend deadline for passage represented a calculated risk, one that could backfire if the vote — now expected late Saturday or Sunday — fails or must be delayed” (Murray and Montgomery, 11/6).

Politico: “The fate of the bill itself rests on the shoulders of a new generation of Democrats whose young careers will be defined, in part, by the votes they cast Saturday — votes sure to be used against many of them in 2010. But Pelosi, ever mindful of the political stakes, seems to have convinced them that there is more danger in not passing a bill after all this time, than in passing one” (O’Connor, 11/6).

Bloomberg reports that House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer Thursday “predicted the House will narrowly pass the overhaul. ‘It’s going to be close,’ he told reporters. ‘This is a huge undertaking; there are legitimate concerns’” (Rowley and Dodge, 11/6).

The Hill reports that others, however, remain confident: “‘It’s coming together,’ said House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), adding that scheduling the vote for Saturday night helped because, ‘it’s always easier to whip when people want to go home’” (Soraghan, 11/5).

Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, in the meantime, say it’s unlikely they will be done with their cost estimate of the House bill before the vote this weekend, The Hill reports in a second story. The Congressional Budget Office has already scored the bill, but Republicans are pressing for the CMS score estimate. “Regardless of what (CMS) concludes, Congress is bound by CBO estimates. However, a high CMS score could persuade some Democratic centrists to vote no” (Young and Cusack, 11/5).

The Newshour has a preview of the House activity with KHN’s Mary Agnes Carey (Bowser, 11/5).

The House will meet at 9 a.m. Saturday, though a final vote on the health care reform bill isn’t likely until the late afternoon, Roll Call reports (Bendery, 11/5).

Everyone knows that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is almost here and just like every other epic game, its launch is covered in a haze of controversy. It seems like every day people find something else to bitch about the upcoming shooter. First, there was the lack of dedicated server support that got PC gamers riled up. Then a clip surfaced showing that *gasp* you might kill civilians. (GTA, anyone?) But it goes on: price gouging, multiplayer limited at 9v9, and online retailers boycotting because of Valve’s Steam or something like that.

But am I the only one that have dismissed all these complaints because of Infinity Ward’s track record? Look at the history here, the Call of Duty franchise is among the very best FPS ever made and Infinity Ward was behind every major PC and console release. The Call of Duty games have never let me down in the past, and I doubt this one will be any different.

Do you remember the original Call of Duty? It was epic. Finally you were’t alone on the battlefield, instead fighting alongside fellow solders. You played as a solder from the American, British, and Soviet armies. The American campaign was almost a take on the Band of Brothers’s HBO mini-series. But it was the Soviet level where you had to defend the multistory apartment building from all angles that defined the game. It has to be one of the hardest and most complex FPS levels of all time.

Not only did Infinity Ward use the Quake III engine to give the game great graphics, but the story was deep and involved. I expect no less from Modern Warfare 2.

Infinity Ward did the same thing with Call of Duty 2 by allowing you to play as four different solders in different battle campaigns. But it was the multiplayer in the second chapter that was stunning. The maps where huge and could support up to 64 players. It’s still a favorite at LAN parties I attend although everyone eventually gravitates to the sniper rifle and the room falls silent for hours as we all sneak around.

It’s Call of Duty 3 that takes a slightly different look. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a good game, but it wasn’t nearly as grand as the previous two games. Infinity Ward didn’t develop this game, another branch of Activision did, Treyarch. COD3 was simply just another WWII FPS and, feel free to argue with me, not worthy of the COD name with game play that boarded on tedious and boring.

But the Infinity Ward release of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare by far made up for COD3. I don’t think I need to go into just how awesome the first player and multiplayer modes are on this game. You probably already know as everyone has played it. It overtook Halo 3 as the most played Xbox 360 online game of all time and became a favorite of PC gamers because it’s so easy to play pirated versions online.

Its success is the reason Infinity Ward and Activision is getting so much flack over its sequel. All die-hard players want is updated graphics, new maps, and slightly different weapons. I don’t blame them, they don’t want their favorite game to change dramatically. I was the same way with the Half Life mod, Day of Defeat.

Infinity Ward has different plans though. From what everyone can gather, this release is going to be different from the previous game. Dedicated servers aren’t going to be available, which doesn’t sit well with online gamer clans and people hoping to play on cracked servers like in the original. It just so happens that these dedicated gamers are vocal online and so causal gamers have been carry a picket line fence too even though they probably won’t notice a difference in game play.

Yet none of the complaints seems to bother me although I consider myself on the edge of being one of those dedicated gamer. I really think it’s because I enjoyed the hell out of each of Infinity Ward’s Call of Duty releases too. Every single one of them is on my top 10 list of best video games of all time. Modern Warfare 2 might very well be a disgrace to online PC gaming, but I’ll wait the couple of weeks and decide that myself before. Infinity Ward has earned that trust.

It’s easy to jump onto an Internet bandwagon, but when you really think about it, Modern Warfare 2 is just another stupid video game. If you boycott it because it doesn’t support 24v24 multiplayer or clans, the game will still go onto sell a bajillion copies and you’ll miss out on all the fun because you’re carrying the banner of some random gamers’ forum. I guess everyone needs to fight for a cause sometimes, but I’d be damn to let it get in the way of me playing what could be a great game.

Best Buy has not one, but two 42-inch TVs on sale for $498.99 each. If you prefer to go with a name brand, there’s the 720p Panasonic VIERA plasma. Otherwise, there’s a model of Best Buy’s house brand, Insignia: a 1080p LCD TV.

The Panasonic’s been marked down from $700 and the Insignia’s been marked down from $650. Shipping adds a whopping $70 to either TV but if you’ve got a local Best Buy with the TVs in stock, you can use the in-store pickup option to avoid those shipping charges.

Panasonic VIERA 720p Plasma [BestBuy.com via dealspl.us]

Insignia 1080p LCD TV [BestBuy.com via dealnews]

Alright, fellas. It has been one heck of a journey, but today, the Motorola DROID and HTC DROID Eris are finally on sale to the general public. From what we’re hearing, stock levels are insanely high so it doesn’t look like many people that want one will miss the opportunity to take one home. If you’re in line, or at the store, or already snatched one and have made the trip home, shoot us in some photos in the comments and let us know how you’re liking the new Android lineup on Verizon, ok?

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Private equity firm Blackstone Group LP (BX.N) posted a quarterly profit, topping expectations and reversing a year-earlier loss, and said it expects to do more deals following an improvement in the lending markets.

The company, which has immense real estate and private equity assets, has increased its deal activity in the past few months, including buying Anheuser-Busch InBev’s (ABI.BR) U.S. theme parks for up to $2.7 billion. It is also considering initial public offerings for a number of its companies.

Blackstone’s third-quarter earnings before income taxes, noncash charges for vesting equity-based compensation, and amortization of intangible assets — a measure it calls “economic net income” (ENI) — were $278.4 million, compared with a loss of $509.3 million a year earlier.

On an after-tax basis, ENI was 25 cents a share. Analysts expected, on average, 15 cents a share, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S/.

Chief Executive Stephen Schwarzman said in a press release that the worst is over, although a recovery in the economy could be “gradual and uneven.”

“We see many opportunities to deploy our substantial available capital,” he said in a statement.

The value of Blackstone’s private equity portfolio rose by 5 percent in the third quarter, although the value of its real estate portfolio fell by 0.4 percent.

Blackstone shares rose 56 cents to $14.43 in early trading on Friday. The shares have doubled in price this year, and the company is valued at about $15.6 billion at current levels. It went public in June 2007 at $31 a share.

Blackstone prefers to focus on the measure ENI because of the big payouts associated with its more than $4 billion initial public offering.

On a GAAP basis, its third-quarter net loss was $176 million, compared with a loss of $340 million a year earlier.

The company said it would pay its regular quarterly distribution of 30 cents a share to unitholders.

By Megan Davies
(Editing by John Wallace and Steve Orlofsky)

ShareThis

The distribution of swine flu vaccines to big name companies in New York has caused an uproar as people complain that children and health care workers should receive top priority. The New York Times reports: “New York City health officials have distributed small amounts of the swine flu vaccine to some major New York companies, including Wall Street banks like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, even as shortages continue. Citigroup has received 1,200 doses, more than half of what it requested, health officials said, and in late October, Goldman received 200 of the 5,400 doses it asked for.”

“By contrast, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center received 200 of the 27,400 doses that it requested for its workers, according to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Jessica Scaperotti, a health department spokeswoman, said the priority was to get the vaccine to pediatricians, obstetricians, gynecologists, community health centers and public and private hospitals. Private companies that have asked for the vaccine are also eligible to receive it, as long as it is distributed to people who are considered at risk. Citigroup and Goldman Sachs said they had administered the vaccine to pregnant women and employees with serious health conditions” (Anderson, 11/5).

The Wall Street Journal reports: “The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention urged health officials around the country Thursday to ensure swine-flu vaccine is getting to high-risk groups, after criticism erupted over distribution to some Wall Street firms. … But criticism of the move showed how much tension has emerged as thousands of children and others considered at risk of complications have waited hours in lines to be inoculated” (McKay, 11/6).

In the latest sign of bizarre and ridiculous lawsuits brought about by the belief that every concept and idea must be owned and licensed, Richard alerts us to the news that the folks behind the infamous Riverdance show are being sued by the costume designer who created outfits for the show in the mid-1990s. While the original agreement had the show paying royalties to the clothing designer to the tune of 60 euros per performance, that deal ran out in 2001. Now, the designer, Jen Kelly complains that Riverdance continues to “use and modify his designs without licence or payment.” Frankly, it seems pretty silly to think that a stage show should need to pay the clothing designer for every performance and that it would be some sort of violation of that designer’s rights to “modify” the designs. Next, will designers start demanding that people pay a royalty fee every time they wear the clothes outside the home? After all, isn’t that a “public performance”?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

The (excellent) Enterprise 2.0 Conference concluded yesterday in San Francisco. Here are some thoughts on several of the key issues bandied about, including ROI, adoption, usability, SharePoint, and the evolving industry.

My first observation is that the conference vibe was much more practical, and much less like a religious revival meeting than previous Enterprise 2.0 events. Some gurus complained about a lack of passion and energy, but I think Andrew McAfee set a great tone in his keynote when he exhorted the audience to replace liberation theology with more realistic goals.

There was much discussion about creating business cases, and ROI in particular. Like many information management projects, demonstrating a financial return on social computing investments can be a fraught (and sometimes fake) exercise. Of course, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a true business case. When enterprises are successful at collaboration or social networking, usually it started with a leap of faith. However, to see what your CFO thinks of faith-based initiatives, read about this illuminating panel discussion. CFOs are right to ask for tight program management, business sponsorship, and real deliverables.

Which brings me to the next big theme: adoption. Many enterprises are struggling with employee adoption of social tools. So, this prompts me to ask — perhaps unfairly — what about the whole idea of "emergence"? Aren’t these tools so cool, so fun, so essential to modern work, that they will sweep through the enterprise in a groundswell held back only by your troglodyte executives? It turns out that many social computing efforts are actually championed by C-level executives. This led several observers at the conference to blame power-hoarding middle managers for poor adoption. Maybe that’s the case in some enterprises, but as a generalization it feels trite to me.

In fact, this whole debate reminds me of all the talk circa 2004 about getting better Intranet adoption. Enterprises had invested in pricey portal systems that employees rarely bothered to visit. Intranet managers learned over time to provide useful services that ease employees’ daily tasks. Often what employees really wanted was a single simple application, like an online org chart. There’s a lesson there.

I have another theory about the adoption conundrum: many of these tools (especially the big combo suites and platforms) are simply too hard to use. Social software vendors high on their own fumes claim their products can be adopted "without training." That’s bunk. Our evaluation research finds usability varying widely among the products, with unexpectedly high requirements for employee training across the board. We also see a broad trend towards more complex, dashboard-style interfaces that appeal to information addicts like me (and maybe you), yet frequently induce vertigo in normal people.

The other big topic, of course, was SharePoint. This crowd was a bit more skeptical about SP2010 than I might have guessed. It turns out that many community and collaboration managers felt burned by SP2007, and they’re cautious. At the same time, some of the larger and more successful case studies can point to SharePoint as the underlying platform — albeit always heavily customized.

Speaking of customization, I’ll end on a positive note. The services community around social/collaborative computing appears to be evolving at a healthy rate. It’s still dominated by indie evangelists, but a broader consulting ecosystem is slowly developing. Companies range from boutique advisory firms who can help with key business issues, to small and large integrators with growing experience implementing complex systems. In other words, this is becoming a more "normal" technology space. This also means that social software vendors are going to have to learn how to run effective channel programs. Today, many vendors are quietly making very good coin providing "adoption" consulting and other non-technical services to customers at a time when I’d rather see them focus more on improving the scalability of their technology. Anyway, for you the customer, a maturing ecosystem is very good news.