Followers

Sunday, June 30, 2019

Catholic Archdiocese of Lagos 2019 Catholic Men Organization (CMO) WEEK & ANNUAL CONVENTION


The Catholic Men Organization, Lagos Archdiocese, invites all to the 2019 CMO WEEK & ANNUAL CONVENTION with the theme:” LET’S CONTINUE WITH CHRIST: (The Way, The Truth and The Life"). John 21:3-7.

Activities will commence in all Parishes on Sunday July 21, 2019 and continue at the Convention Centre; St. Gregory’s College, S/West, Ikoyi, Lagos; on Friday July 26 to Sunday July 28. 


The Convention shall feature Spiritual and Entrepreneurial talks with a Campfire event for Social Interaction. The Catholic Archbishop of Lagos State, Nigeria, His Grace, Most Revd. Dr. Alfred Adewale Martins DD will induct new members and also give awards to deserving individuals  during the Convention. Come and let’s seek the face of God together.

CMO...Christ is our leader!!!

Google And Amazon’s Disruption Of The Online Travel Industry Is Looking Inevitable


Is the travel industry heading for a new world order?
There remains little doubt among travel experts that tech goliaths Google and Amazon will dominate the online travel arena, threatening to bust up the duopoly of Expedia Group (which owns Expedia, Hotels.com, Travelocity, Orbitz, Trivago and Hotwire) and Booking Holdings (which owns Priceline, Kayak and Booking.com) that has reigned for years.
Google is already making an impact with its soup-to-nuts suite of planning and booking tools. Last year, Google came in second to Expedia for one-stop shops travelers consider, according to the Portrait of American Travelers study by travel and hospitality marketing firm MMGY Global. The same study showed preference for Expedia had dipped to 64% in 2018 from 67% in 2017. 
So far, Amazon has only dipped its pinky toe into the travel waters but there’s some evidence – and intense speculation – that something bigger is coming.
Both internet giants bring the kind of vast resources and big-data reservoirs that allow them to dramatically change how we book trips.
Yet with the landscape already shifting under its feet, a travel industry not known for nimbleness is largely unprepared for the freight train coming its way, say experts.
“Oh wait, I hear something. The tracks are shaking — but there’s plenty of room for it to stop,” deadpans Robert Cole, founder and CEO of Rock Cheetah, a hotel marketing and travel technology consulting firm.
“The hospitality industry has a patented four-step method to deal with disruption,” says Cole. “Step one is to ignore it. Step two is that when it's pointed out to them, they continue to ignore it. Step three is they panic, and step four is they complain about it.”
Even so, there are signs the industry is starting to pull its head out of the sand. At last year's Phocuswright conference, a panel on the future of corporate travel became a discussion about the inevitability of disruption by Google and Amazon, according to Travel Weekly.
And earlier this month at the Hospitality Industry Technology Exposition and Conference (HITEC) in Minneapolis, a panel entitled “The Next Big Industry Threat” focused on the risks posed by technology giants with deep pockets and keen e-commerce strategies.
“Of all of the companies that we discussed, the two that obviously bubbled up top were Google and Amazon,” says Nick Price, CEO of NetSys Technology, a hospitality technology consultancy.
“And, in fact, Amazon in a significant way was determined to be the more significant threat long term, even though it’s not present in hospitality today and Google is. Amazon is such an efficient and effective digital retailer that it is, by its nature, a primary potential competitor.”
Some see an eventual changing of the guard as part of the natural cycle of the industry. “In a way, nothing is really new in terms of, yes, there are always big players that try to dominate the market, crowd out innovation and crowd out competition,” says Dennis Schaal, executive editor for the travel intel site Skift.
Of course, neither Google nor Amazon hold any flight or hotel inventory. But what they do hold is information – oodles and oodles of it.
“Google, and Amazon in particular, are very, very interesting because they both have massive user bases,” says Cole. “Google is certainly predominantly an advertising-driven platform but it’s got billions of users and has all this behavioral data where it can really do some interesting things. And, from the beginning, Amazon has collected a lot of data and understands the relationships between what people like and their behaviors.”
Google dives in
Last month, Google revealed its streamlined trip-planning platform, Google Travel, which brings Google Flights, Google Hotels and other tools under one roof. It’s much more comprehensive than your average booking site. For travelers who regularly use multiple Google products – Google Search, Gmail, Google Calendar, Google Maps and so on – this platform will keep all of your trip research and past itineraries in one place.
Since the typical trip can take days or weeks to plan, this can be very handy. As you plan and book a trip, all of your travel-related queries from Google Search, saved places from Google Maps, and flagged flights and hotels are fed automatically to your Trips page when you’re signed into your Google account.
The cross-pollination of data across all Google products results in an extremely personalized Google Travel experience that some people will find wildly helpful and others, frankly, will find overly intrusive. The first time you enter the platform, you’re able to view your previous trips going back several years neatly arranged before you, which might be disconcerting if you were expecting a blank slate. (If you don’t want Google to track all your private results, you can opt out by adjusting your settings, but then you lose the cross-platform functionality.)
“I would like to see it less rammed down my throat,” says Schaal. “On the other hand, I do like certain aspects of personalization.”
In the end, says Cole, it boils down to: “Who do you trust? Because some people inherently trust Google, and they don't care. They're like, ‘You know what? They're making my life more convenient.' Google Maps might tell me, ‘Hey, I should leave earlier to get to work on time.' Well, how does it know that? It's followed me to work every day for the last three years,” says Cole.
Google Maps is emerging as an increasingly critical cog in the Google machine. Despite being the No. 1 navigation app with over one billion downloads, Google Maps does not have “superapp” status in the way that WeChat dominates life in China, points out Schaal, who has written extensively about the topic in Skift.
“In China, you wake up in the morning and five minutes later you're looking at WeChat and you're on it all day because you can do everything on it,” he said. “It's messaging, it's phone calls, it's file sharing, it's all kinds of e-commerce.”
“Google denies that there is some grand master plan to create a superapp,” says Schaal. Still, Google Maps is clearly on its way to becoming the do-it-all Swiss army knife on your smartphone. In the past few months, Google Maps has rolled out a dizzying number of new features, including incognito mode, real-time speeds, parking locations, traffic jam crowdsourcing and real-time predictions on mass transit crowdedness.
“Google Travel is constantly improving, just like Google Maps is constantly approving,” says Schaal. “They’re always working on it behind the scenes, always tweaking, and you can argue that, yes, they're solving real problems.” To his point, Google’s machine learning has become so refined that travelers might learn their flight is delayed from Google before they hear from the airline.
As for booking trips, Google gives consumers a lot to love. “First of all, Google Flights is just so fast. And there are all kinds of tools for traveling to alternative airports or finding the best day to fly to get the best price,” says Schaal.
One of the biggest frustrations travelers have when booking trips is that, despite an overwhelming amount of hotel inventory available, online travel agencies (OTAs) and suppliers all seem to cough up the very same stuff. Google Hotels tries to surface up the most relevant inventory from the OTAs and hotels and, since last March, it also offers vacation rental properties worldwide.
But here’s where many say Google has an unfair advantage. As the world’s largest search engine, Google is the defacto gatekeeper for online travel planning – a superpower status the OTAs have never enjoyed. When you search for a flight or a hotel, Google controls what appears at the top of a search engine results page. Shockingly, the prime real estate is given to Google’s own platform.
And increasingly, no matter where you begin to plan a trip online, all roads lead to more Google products. Google recently increased its review volume exponentially, and made Google ratings more prominent in its search, maps and hotel listings.
“Google argues that the reason that they put Google Hotels and Google Flights on top of the page isn’t to shut out other competitors but to provide the best answers to your travel queries,” says Schaal. “I think that's pretty much bullshit. TripAdvisor, Expedia, Booking.com, Hotels.com – all of the OTAs can sometimes have lower prices. You still always have to comparison shop.”
The reality is that the travel booking ecosystem is a tangled web of co-dependency. The OTAs and hotels need Google to send them traffic and Google relies on the OTAs and hotels for advertising dollars.
“Expedia’s biggest competitor now is Google,” says Schaal, “and Expedia spent about $5 billion last year on Google ads. That the OTAs are dependent on Google is the whole problem. I don't think that Google Travel is solving problems to the degree that would justify its monopoly-like stature, and I do think it’s hurting competition.”
“I always say that the hotels are bringing a teaspoon to a nuclear weapons fight. It's not fair,” says Cole. “Right now, Google is the main source of traffic for hotels. And there's not another channel where they can cost effectively replace that traffic.”
Yet despite Google’s domination of their sandbox, Expedia and Booking will likely continue to do just fine, says Cole. “Google doesn't want to abandon them. Google wants a healthy marketplace where all companies can bid on a level playing field. Google isn’t going to put a thumb on the scale for the OTAs or for the suppliers because it understands that the suppliers are paying the OTAs.”
“And right now, hotels like Google a lot,” says Cole, “because Google is giving them better tools to be able to advertise more effectively and counter the online travel agency duopoly between Expedia and Booking.”
Amazon dips in a toe

Google may have a head start, but Amazon is arguably more feared.
The retailing juggernaut had a brief flirtation with the travel industry in 2015, when it added hotel listings to Amazon Local, its former daily deals platform, and then launched a dedicated hotel booking platform called Destinations that focused on helping customers find nearby weekend getaways. After expanding Destinations to 35 cities within a matter of months, Amazon unceremoniously shut down the service without warning and later pulled the plug on Amazon Local. The company offered no explanation other than to say it had "learned a lot" from the experience, leaving many industry analysts scratching their heads.
Flash forward to the spring of 2018, when Morgan Stanley internet analyst Brian Nowak said he thought Amazon should take another look at the lucrative online travel market. In a note to investors, Nowak wrote that Amazon's "focus on selection/service, pricing, and frictionless payment that drive conversion and stronger user economics also translate directly to travel." He estimated that Amazon could make $600 million in profits annually if it built an online hotel business roughly half the size of Expedia’s.
Several weeks ago, Amazon took what Schaal calls a “baby step” back into travel when it launched flights in India with the help of a local OTA called Cleartrip. “I would expect Amazon to roll this out in other emerging markets, maybe in the Middle East or in Southeast Asia,” he says. “India is a key target market for Amazon in general.”
While Amazon’s re-entry into the hospitality sector remains speculative, Price thinks the company is uniquely positioned to completely change how we shop for hotels.
“Hotels are weak digital retailers,” Price says flatly. “And the evidence for that is the rise of the online travel agents, which over 20 years came from nowhere to become the dominant force in hotel room retailing.”
“Right now, online travel agents only sell rooms. They’re selling exactly the same product as the hotel itself. But Amazon could differentiate the product,” says Price. “For example, I haven't found a single hotel company that can actually create a unique basket of goods for me in the way that Amazon does.”
Price envisions a scenario where a traveler might be able to fill a shopping basket with exactly what he or she needs for an upcoming trip – say, a room for five days, two evening restaurant reservations, a bottle of champagne and flowers in the room and a taxi or limo from the airport. “Now that is a basket of goods. That is hotel retail. Not a single hotel company that I'm aware of anywhere that can do that and yet Amazon does it every day,” he says.
“From a consumer standpoint, I would welcome an Amazon Travel,” says Schaal. “First of all, it's competition against Google, which then wouldn't necessarily be the biggest player in travel. And Amazon would certainly go for lower prices.”
On the issue of consumer trust, Price thinks Amazon has the edge over Google. “Most people give Google information unintentionally, whereas customers give Amazon information very intentionally through intentional purchases,” he explains.
“Amazon Prime subscribers are a very, very loyal, very well-understood group, which is probably even better than simply being a large group,” says Cole.
“I pay Amazon on an annual basis for the pleasure of being part of Prime. I'm not a loyalty member, I'm a subscriber,” says Price. “I'm already intellectually and emotionally bought in.”
Will Amazon jump into the deep end of the online travel booking? If it happens, it’s likely to come without warning.
“Google's culture is to try something, see if it works, and if it doesn't work, shut it down and move on. It is much more inclined to experiment and accept failure. I don't see that from Amazon,” says Price.
“Amazon tends to study something for a long time in its super-secret labs, and then come out and shock people,” says Price. “I don't think there were many people that knew Amazon was going to purchase Whole Foods, for example.”
“For all we know,” says Price, “Amazon could right now be working on a retail model of how to merchandise hospitality experiences for the 21st century and we wouldn't know.”


Box Office: 'Toy Story 4' Nears $500 Million, 'Aladdin' Nears $875 Million And 'Dark Phoenix' Bottoms Out


Toy Story 4 topped the weekend box office for a second time, earning $58 million (-52%) to bring its ten-day domestic total to $237 million. In terms of second-weekend drops, that's a drop right between Incredibles 2 (-56%), Minions (-57%) and Shrek the Third (-56%) and Toy Story 3 (-46%) and Finding Dory (-46%). In terms of ten-day cumes, it's closer to Toy Story 3 ($226 million) than Finding Dory ($286 million).
It started earning less than Toy Story 3 on a day to day basis right after that $20 million Tuesday. It'll likely fall behind the 2010 sequel's running cume sometime early next week. With a new global cume of $496.5 million, this merely means is that the Pixar sequel may have to settle for most of the money instead of "all the money."
If it continues to leg like Shrek the Third and Minions, it'll still end up between $360 million and $370 million, or right between the adjusted totals of Up ($290 million in 2009/$353 million adjusted) and The Incredibles ($262 million in 2004/$370 million adjusted). But if it legs like Incredibles 2 going forward, it'll end up just over/under the $406 million adjusted gross ($255 million in 2001) of Monsters Inc. So, expectations notwithstanding, it's still playing like an upper-level Pixar flick.
Once again, any of Toy Story 4's loss is arguably Aladdin's gain. The other Walt Disney biggie, arguably the more important one in the equation, earned another $9.344 million (-29%) this weekend. It also crossed the $300 million mark in North America, ending the frame with $305.8 million domestic total. The $183 million-budgeted Guy Ritchie-directed musical has now earned a stunning $874 million worldwide.
Aladdin is already Will Smith's biggest grossing movie in unadjusted global grossers, soaring past the $817 million cume of 1996's Independence Day last week. The film should top out past the $325 million domestic total of Suicide Squad to take the domestic crown as well. A domestic finish above the (unadjusted) $334 million cume of Alice in Wonderland is not out of the question, nor is an eventual global gross above wherever Toy Story 4 ends.
Universal and Illumination's $80 million-budgeted The Secret Life of Pets 2 earned another $7.1 million (-31%) in weekend four for a $131.2 million domestic and $223 million worldwide cume. Like Annabelle Comes Home (which recovered a little for a $31 million Wed-Sun debut), this sequel is absolutely going to make money but is absolutely a disappointing considering the brand and expectations. Oh well, bring on Minions 2: The Rise of Gru. Hey, that's a sequel/prequel combo just like Annabelle Comes Home. Uh oh!
Child's Play dropped hard in its second weekend, earning just $4.276 million (-70%) and bringing its ten-day total to $23.405 million. As feared, Warner Bros. moving Annabelle Comes Home up by a few days (presumably to avoid crashing into Spider-Man: Far From Home and Stranger Things season 3) put the hurt into the other killer doll movie. Ironically, this Orion/United Artists Releasing remake of the 1988 slasher classic was a lot better than everyone expected.
That said, when folks don't want the product, even decent reviews and "Hey, no, no, wait, this is good!" buzz can't move the needle. It's a pattern we've seen all year, where franchise titles, even well-reviewed ones, have stumbled because audiences didn't have an innate interest in a next chapter or a new version. It's why John Wick: Chapter 3 will cross $160 million domestic and $300 million today, but Men In Black: International ($65 million domestic by today) may not top $250 million worldwide.
Rocketman grossed $3.87 million (-37%) in its fifth weekend for a new $84.174 million cume, giving it a shot at passing $90 million domestic by the end. The $40 million, R-rated Elton John biopic has earned $165.5 million worldwide. Godzilla: King of the Monsters has now earned $106.5 million domestic and $377 million worldwide. Dark Phoenix grossed $1.66 million (-53%) in weekend four for a $63.6 million domestic and $244 million global cume. Luc Besson's (slightly underrated) Anna will drop 61% for a $1.4 million weekend (from a $3.8 million debut) for a terrible $6.631 million ten-day total.

Box Office: 'Spider-Man: Far From Home' Superhero Fatigues Past $111 Million Overseas

Box Office: 'Spider-Man: Far From Home' Swings Past $100 Million Overseas
Sony's Spider-Man: Far From Home got off to a dynamite start in China this weekend, earning $97.5 million in its first three days of release. That's the third-biggest MCU debut ever in China, behind only Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame. Coupled with early releases in Japan and Hong Kong, the $160 million-budgeted Marvel superhero sequel has earned $111 million overseas in advance of its global launch this week. So, yeah, with $19 million in IMAX alone, Spidey is swinging as high as hoped.
The Jon Watts-directed flick, which stars Tom Holland, Jake Gyllenhaal and Zendaya, has earned solid word-of-mouth in China thus far. The absence of The Eight Hundred (originally slated for July 5) and Better Days (originally slated for July 12) means clear skies ahead of the latest Peter Parker passion play. Those presumed/preordained Chinese blockbusters both got pulled from the slate for "technical reasons," which is everyone's favorite euphemism for Chinese governmental censorship.
The $80 million 1937-set war flick was (allegedly) pulled due to issues with opposing political parties being presented too sympathetically, while the coming-of-age drama ran into trouble over depictions of bullying and sexual assault. That's not Hollywood's problem, but it is to their benefit both in the short term (yay for The Secret Life of Pets 2 and The Lion King) and possibly the long term. Hollywood can't play second fiddle to Chinese biggies if the Chinese biggies keep getting cancelled prior to release.
But, to be fair, we can't give too much credit to national politics concerning two movies which weren't slated to open until next week. Yes, Sony opened Spider-Man: Far From Home a week early to get out of the way of The Eight Hundred, but the $110 million debut is about Spider-Man: Far From Home. Spider-Man, with or without the MCU, has always been popular in China. Even Venom pulled a $111 million opening weekend and eventual $272 million cume late last year.
Far From Home's $97.5 million Chinese debut is well above the $69 million start for Homecoming and could lead to a finish between and $164 million (if it legs like Homecoming) and $239 million (if, more likely, it legs like Venom). That's a lot of wiggle room, so we'll see how it holds in Asia as it expands over the rest of the world over the long holiday weekend. At a glance, it could easily be over the $500 million mark by this time next week.


'Avengers: Endgame' Won't Top 'Avatar' At The Worldwide Box Office


The much-discussed and debated re-issue of Avengers: Endgame earned a perfectly okay $5.5 million over the weekend in North America. Its tenth weekend went up around 189% from last weekend's $1.9 million gross. Its per-screen-average went from $2,018 per-theater in 985 auditoriums to $2,716 per-theater in 2,025 auditoriums. So, yeah, it got a bump for sure, but it wasn't exactly the earthquake that hardcore MCU fans were hoping for. The film has now earned $841.3 million in North America from that initial $357 million domestic debut in late April.
That gives Avengers 4 a 2.35x weekend-to-final multiplier. That's still the lowest multiplier for a $200 million-plus opener, but (obviously) the leggiest run ever for a $300 million-plus opener, and it's now just above Iron Man 3 ($409 million/$174 million) and just below Avengers: Age of Ultron ($459 million/$191 million) and Iron Man 2 ($312 million/$128 million) in terms of legs. At the very least, the reissue will let the Russo Bros-directed epic avoid becoming one of the very least-leggy MCU movies in domestic release.
Since the movie never actually left theaters, you can argue that this still counts under the initial theatrical release. That only really matters if it moves up more than a spot on the inflation-adjusted list, as Return of the Jedi's $847 million adjusted-for-inflation cume includes it share of theatrical re-releases. When that happens, it'll bee 13th-biggest adjusted gross for an initial theatrical release and the 16th-biggest counting (now including (The Empire Strikes Back, 101 Dalmatians and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs) any and and all reissues.
But, no, it's not going to pass the inflation-adjusted domestic totals for Avatar, be it the initial theatrical release ($749 million in 2009/$866 million adjusted) or the whole cume ($760 million/$877 million). The overseas gross of this "new" version of the movie (with includes an unfinished deleted scene, a Stan Lee tribute and the first few minutes of Spider-Man: Far From Home) was just $2.3 million. With a $7.5 million global gross and a new $2.761 billion cume, this reissue won't be enough to get past Avatar's $2.788 billion worldwide cume.
If this re-release plays like A Star Is Born, whereby the Bradley Cooper/Lady Gaga musical romance was put back into 1,235 theaters in early March with 12 minutes of new footage, then we're looking at a multiplier of around 2.53x. That Warner Bros. flick earned $1.854 million on its 22nd weekend and then added $2.399 million to its eventual $215.282 million cume. A similar performance would give Avengers: Endgame an $850 million total by the end. But it could go either way.
On one hand, with the hype dying down and all eyes focused on Spider-Man: Far From Home, the Avengers flick could plummet to Earth and end up closer to $845 million. Conversely, the hype around Spider-Man: Far From Home could continue to make Avengers: Endgame a big deal and thus continue to keep it around for awhile longer. The point of this reissue was to boost Sony's Tom Holland-starring Spider-Man flick, which is being sold as Phase Three epilogue, but it could be mutually beneficial.
Captain Marvel took its biggest weekend jump (+5.7%) the weekend before Avengers: Endgame launched and took its smallest weekend drop (-8.7%) on the same weekend Avengers: Endgame opened with $357 million. It earned an additional $35 million in the run-up to and release of Endgame and has since earned $426.6 million domestic. Black Panther had its two smallest weekend drops just before (-14.6%) and right during (-4%) Avengers: Infinity War's opening weekend. It earned $16.4 million after Infinity War opened for an eventual $700 million domestic cume.
The reissue was always about boosting Spider-Man: Far From Home and punking Warner Bros,' Annabelle Comes Home, and in that sense it was a success. The expanded screen count was partially about being able to supply increased demand stemming from Spider-Man and the extra footage was mostly to make sure we all speculated about it. The reissue was about building excitement for Far From Home, but if Far From Home re-ups excitement for Avengers: Endgame, there you go. It won't be enough to overcome the current $27 million deficit, but c'est la vie.
All of this is mere trivia, since Walt Disney now owns Avatar, they are flying high on Toy Story 4 and Aladdin and they have The Lion King on deck for another likely home run. The only folks who care about whether Avengers: Endgame tops Avatar are hardcore MCU fans who are treating this like a sporting event with their favorite team trying to best their hated rivals. Again, Disney owns Marvel, Lucasfilm and Avatar now, so unless you own stock in Disney this won't affect you.
Once again, I'd argue that Disney would rather be able to sell Avatar 2 in December of 2021 as the sequel to the biggest movie of all time, so in that sense it's not really in their benefit to best the James Cameron 3-D original. If it doesn't happen, Disney will have the biggest domestic grosser (Star Wars: The Force Awakens), the biggest China grosser (Avengers: Endgame) and the biggest overseas/worldwide grosser (Avatar) in their library. If it happens, it happens, but Disney has bigger fish to fry right now.

An Impact Accelerator For Startups Just North Of The Big Apple

A few years ago, Danny Potocki got to wondering. New York City was, of course, home to a kazillion impact startups and social entrepreneurs. But what about the area just north of the city? Wasn't there a sizeable number of fledgling social enterprises? And wouldn’t they benefit from a new startup accelerator?
With that in mind, with funding from Empire State Development Corporation, among others, he recently launched Accel7, a nonprofit accelerator program for early-stage tech-focused impact enterprises in the Hudson Valley. The Accel is short for accelerator and the seven refers to the counties in the Hudson Valley the program targets.
“We’re bringing startup culture to the Hudson Valley,” says Potocki, who is managing director and previously led business development for two companies.
Based in White Plains, NY, the accelerator is an outgrowth of the Hudson Valley Center for Innovation, a 15-year-old group that provides training and education for entrepreneurs.
The focus is on education, wellness, mobility and sustainable food energy, but also accepts enterprises in other industries. And, while the accelerator is all about the Hudson Valley, the goal is to help cohort members scale nationally. Plus, startups outside the area are also applying. Accel7, which takes an equity stake in its cohort companies, provides $50,000 worth of support.
Potocki first got thinking about environmental, social and governance  (ESG) issues when he was working several years ago on a consulting project involving ETF mutual funds. That led him to become interested in applying such goals to startups. “Our time would be better spent solving, say, education problems than helping a founder build an app to find an outfit for cats,” he says.
Companies work out of KOI Creative Space, a White Plains co-working facility. There’s also CO, a Rhinebeck, NY co-working location.
The first cohort includes five companies. Example: Mt. Vernon, NY-based Lessonbee, which aims to transform health education with a new platform of health and sex education materials. According to founder Reva McPollom, her goal of building better health education will have a profound impact on schools. “The educational system is unhealthy. And health education now makes kids feel awkward and isolated,” she says. “We want to help schools create the opposite, helping students feel confident, connected and worthy of health and success.”
The other four enterprises include Capri, an online education platform supporting girls' financial literacy; Cruz Street, which aims to democratize data for businesses and communities through its data management platform; Domain, a co-working, conference and community space backed by locals giving back to their community; and SportsHi, a team management app for high school students and coaches allowing them to be active and engaged with both sports and their communities.

Saturday, June 29, 2019

GOOGLE IS BUILDING EQUIANO: THIRD UNDER-WATER CABLE BETWEEN PORTUGAL AND SOUTH AFRICA


Google has announced plans to build Equiano: another of its undersea cables connecting Portugal and South Africa.
It will eventually also connect Nigeria, hence the name Equiano, after an enslaved Nigerian writer who bought his own freedom.
Equiano is Google’s 3rd private cable after Dunant which connects Europe and the US, and Curie, connecting US and Chile.
It will be the first undersea cable to use optical switching at the fiber pair level making it easier to allocate capacity on an as needed basis.
Google emphasizes that Equiano will be able to carry about 20 times the capacity of the last cable built to serve this region. It will feature several branching units that can be used to connect lines to other countries in between the two nodes.
The first branch will connect the cable to Lagos, Nigeria.
It is possible that Google is setting up Equiano in preparation for its first data center in Africa. This is not beyond the realm of the possible, as a lot of Google’s competitors have data centers on the continent.
In addition to having their own cables, Google is also a partner in a number of cable consortia operating cables globally.
Alcatel Submarine Networks will be contracted to build the cable. The first phase of this project should be complete by 2021.
credit: Innovation Village

ARE CRYPTOCURRENCY INVESTORS READY FOR ASSET TOKENIZATION?


For the last several years, cryptocurrency has been a topic of major focus. This interest includes niche crypto-centric communities and in the general population. The change is partially due to the massive growth of Bitcoin toward the end of 2017. Within the course of that year, prices jumped from $900 to nearly $20,000. To some, it was a sign of the legitimacy of cryptocurrency since so many people were buying into it and using it for everyday purchases. When prices fell, naysayers took it as a sign of the volatility of the currency. Since then, prices have stabilized. Now, cryptocurrency is more frequently used than ever before, attracting cryptocurrency investors back into the market. 
With cryptocurrency proponents finally feeling secure in their investments and ongoing usage, it’s worth wondering whether their perception of value in the blockchain can carry over to newer, even more, complex applications. Notably, we’re in the early stages of seeing the development of asset tokenization, which is the application of the blockchain for tokenizing both tangible and intangible assets.
For asset tokenization to work, it requires the full faith and activity from a majority of the population. Cryptocurrency investors will ultimately serve as the gateway for this public acceptance. In this role, they will become a potential barometer for the application’s legitimacy and force of persuasion for skeptics. 
The Basics of Asset Tokenization 
Before we explore this topic in full, we need to understand the basics of asset tokenization. It’s best to think of this as a kind of marriage of publicly traded stocks and blockchain-based exchanges. In publicly traded companies, authorities can issue fractional shares of ownership in the company.
These are sold in the form of “shares” whose value is calculated based on the percentage of ownership and the total value of the company. Under most conditions, any consumer can buy or sell these shares from and to other consumers. This concept is limited in scope. Only corporations can issue shares this way. And, they’re subject to an inordinate number of rules and regulations. 
Asset tokenization relies on the blockchain to conduct exchanges, almost immediately making it more secure and less susceptible to fraud. More importantly, it allows the distribution of fractional shares of ownership in practically anything. It could be a sole proprietorship, a partnership, a physical asset like a building, or even an intangible asset like the rights to intellectual property. Therefore, it has the potential to revolutionize many industries since it enables owners and creators to raise funds more easily. Also, it provides an alternative form of compensation and investment for interested parties. 
The Persuasion Problem For Cryptocurrency Investors
However, asset tokenization’s growth is limited by the number of people willing to accept it as a form of legitimate exchange. Fiat currency is money issued by a government that isn’t backed by a physical commodity. Instead, its value is based on the value people believe it has. Similarly, the value of a tokenized asset (at least one without a physical counterpart) will depend on the public’s belief in that fractional token’s value. Similarly, the economics of buying and selling these fractional shares of ownership will be based on substantial market participation.
One of the biggest challenges is persuading people to participate in the system. For business owners hoping to save capital early on by compensating employees in shares of ownership in the business, it means convincing employees of the value of this compensation.
For musicians wanting to be paid fairly for their creative work, it means convincing both audiences and producers to switch to an alternative system. In these small-scale cases, a meaningful presentation could be all it takes to persuade your audience. In the context of society at large, there needs to be a more significant change in public opinion. 
Using Cryptocurrency as a Bridge
Cryptocurrency could feasibly serve as a bridge connecting people who are relatively unfamiliar with the blockchain to the concept of asset tokenization. Currently, there are more than 32 million Bitcoin wallets set up. This is a substantive base of users that can generate meaningful traction in the price of the currency. Thanks to the volatility of the currency in the past, hundreds of millions of people understand what Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are (to a degree). And, they may now have enough faith in the system to see it as a form of legitimate currency. 
In this context, cryptocurrency investors are experts when it comes to blockchain-based exchanges. If they apply their enthusiasm and good faith to asset tokenization, they could represent a base of 32 million (or more) willing participants. Plus, they could serve as ambassadors to people who may otherwise struggle to understand asset tokenization and its value. Evangelists pushing for the public to understand the benefits of cryptocurrency should have little trouble transitioning to evangelize the benefits of asset tokenization. 
The Next Level of Cryptocurrency? 
It’s appropriate to think about asset tokenization as a natural extension of cryptocurrency. In some ways, any tokenized asset will function almost like a self-contained cryptocurrency. In addition to rallying behind a single, universal cryptocurrency, there would be an ecosystem of different forms of tokenized exchanges. This would be a kind of all-digital, universally translatable, and secure platform for bartering and compensation. 
There are some challenges for asset tokenization to overcome in addition to public persuasion. Notably, developing a tokenized asset would require the expertise of a blockchain developer. However, not all companies or creatives would have access to an expert or a platform through which they could develop it.
Additionally, there may be significant regulatory hurdles that follow. For example, will the SEC consider tokenized assets as securities or a form of currency? Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are facing similar scrutiny from regulatory agencies all over the world. Therefore, it’s unlikely to be a long-term problem. There is just a short-term ambiguity that may be hard to navigate. 
Again, one of the greatest advantages of asset tokenization is that it already draws from existing cryptocurrencies as a foundation. Regulatory agencies that draw up plans for how to regulate cryptocurrencies will have a much easier time developing new rules and regulations for digitally tokenized assets. It’s like they have a blueprint in place already. 
Prioritizing the Benefits of the Blockchain For Cryptocurrency Investors
Cryptocurrency and asset tokenization are inherently different concepts. Yet, they originate from the same important technology: the blockchain. And, it’s the blockchain that’s going to drive the future of economics and personal exchanges. Though cryptocurrencies will grow along their own trajectory, they’re also serving as our first introduction to the blockchain’s capabilities and advantages in full force. This is almost like a warmup to the full potential that the blockchain could bring
In that context, cryptocurrency investors are among the first advocates of truly revolutionary technology. They’re going to serve an important role in garnering public acceptance for future applications. If asset tokenization is going to take off, it’s going to require collaboration on the part of blockchain developers, company owners, consumers, and regulatory agencies to create a common agreement about the benefits of the system. Thanks to cryptocurrency, we’re already progressing in this direction.