user_tpm's Profile

Great article. I agree that Cadre will be challenged with trying to change the mindset of traditional investors, but it is great that the platform enables more investors to have access to possible real estate investment opportunities. I was really optimistic about the company until I realized that the investor network is still limited to “A network of high-wealth individuals or “qualified purchasers” who want to make real estate investments” (http://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-cadre-and-how-to-invest-in-its-real-estate-deals-2016-6). I wonder how much of the traditional way of doing business (i.e. restricting information to certain investors) will translate to the digital world?
Also, I wonder about the company’s competitive advantage. How long do you think they can remain competitive by just having liquid capital as their primary source of competitive advantage?

Great article. I completely agree that the Met should continue investing in using virtual reality. It would be great to be able to join friends from different locations (https://www3.oculus.com/en-us/blog/join-friends-in-vr-with-new-oculus-social-features/) to enjoy the museum together. Also, I think virtual reality is great for people that do not have the financial means to travel to the Met to enjoy the museum as well.
Does the Met use augmented reality to show films about the paintings during the visit?
Another thought, I wonder if the Met will have to restrict access to the digital media, so it is not available everywhere? Is it possible that the use of digital forms of the paintings will reduce the allure of coming to the Met? Nonetheless, it is great to see the museum adapting to the changing environment.

Great article. I do think that block chain technology can be a great opportunity for banks to develop more security of goods and receivables. I wonder if all of the banks will have to connect their systems together for the block-chain technology to work? Also, I am curious about the cyber security risks of using blockchain technology? It appears that the blockchain technology is a great way to improve cyber security risks (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sergio-fernandez-de-cordova/is-blockchain-the-future-_b_11398600.html).
I also think that the blockchain technology presents an opportunity for the banks because I would assume that the banks would rather find a new way to use their employees, rather than right off losses from fraudulent transactions. The savings from better use of their employees can be used to finance other projects for the bank.
Lastly, I think blockchain technology has so many possible use cases (http://www.blockchaintechnologies.com/blockchain-applications), I wonder which industries will truly adopt the technology?

Great article. I think it is really neat that Samsung is able to connect all of these products together. I also agree that connected cars really make sense as an addition to their current portfolio. Since companies are making investments into electric cars and autonomous cars, I think it makes sense to integrate new cars into the smart home system.
Also, for me, the most exciting aspect of smart homes is the ability to reduce energy consumption (http://www.smarthome.com/sc-save-energy-the-smarthome-way) and the possible cost savings for the customers(https://www.electronichouse.com/home-energy-management/4-smart-home-technologies-can-reduce-electricity-bills/). I think that older homes are inefficient in terms of energy management, so I see IoT as a way to improve energy management. So, the company should definitely market the possible cost and time savings for using these products.
Lastly, are these platforms know to be secured in a cyber security sense? Cyber security issues might slow the adoption of IoT technologies.

Great article. I think that there is definitely a space for algorithm investments for retail investors since some Hedge Funds currently use algorithm investing as their primary method of investing. I do agree with you, I wonder how they can differentiate their product? Since most investors deploy similar strategies to investing, is it possible for them to truly create and edge for their customers? Also, I was skeptical about the automatic adjustments to the portfolio because I know that some investors try to keep their security for longer than one year to take advantage of the long term capital gain tax, but I was please to read that the Betterment algorithm takes taxes into account (https://www.betterment.com/resources/investment-strategy/taxes/investment-switching-costs-calculate-your-costs-and-benefits/).
I’m also curious about their ability to keep their cost structure low if they start looking to grow the company and acquire more customers. I wonder if the need to grow will force them to spend more on marketing, leading them to operate with smaller margins?

Great article, thank you for the post. I think it is great what the company is doing to reduce emissions, and I agree that the company should enforce the same stringent standards on its suppliers. Also, I think that the company should focus on making investments to respond to possible hurricanes on cities. This article offers a few suggestions of how to prepare for a hurricane by improving the technology infrastructure of the city: https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/5-Ways-to-Avoid-Effects-of-Another-Hurricane-Sandy. Additionally, the government or the company might consider adopting some of the same investments that Venice made: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jun/16/inside-venice-bid-hold-back-tide-sea-level-rise.

Great article. I agree that the company should be more aligned with their messaging both internally and externally. Also, pertaining to your suggestions, I did some quick research and found an article that suggested that partnerships between oil company’s and university are not always productive when the research university does not have full control over their work (https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2010/10/14/8484/big-oil-goes-to-college/). Although there are reasons why the partnership might not produce material results, the partnership still has the ability to produce great outcomes if the two parties can agree on the terms, and the university is allowed to freely develop creative solutions.
Additionally, I completely agree that the company should add more instrumentation and technology to monitor leakages at the plant. Having worked at a chemical plant, I know that leaks are a big issue that are hard to detect and there are numerous technological advancements to address this issue (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151001095522.htm). Moreover, I agree that as the technology for measuring leaks increase, so should the requirements for monitoring and addressing leak issues be increased.

I think the company should diversify into renewable energy, but the firing of Crane leads me to wonder if the company will continue down the same path? I am curious to find out if the company is still making investments into renewable energy. Also, are there truly synergies between renewable energy production and coal energy production; more specifically, what type of capital expenditure is required to facilitate the integration of the renewable energy productions? Also, is there a change in the customer’s expectation since the company is moving from coal to renewable energy; is renewable 100% reliable? Lastly, if the company does decide to switch to renewable, can renewable reliably meet the energy demand of the US (http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/re_futures/)?

Great article. I think it is great that Apple is putting more of a focus on reducing emissions by focusing on operations at the manufacturing plant and the production of raw materials, but I also know that a large part of the raw materials are extracted by Congolese people under harsh working conditions (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3280872/iPhone-mineral-miners-Africa-use-bare-hands-coltan.html). I applaud the company for their efforts to reduce emissions, but I hope that the decreasing emissions initiative does not have other unintended consequences, such as reductions in raw material cost by continuing to use minerals extracted by individuals with terrible working conditions.
Furthermore, I would be extremely interested to find out how the company’s profit margin are impacted by the financial pledges and the commitment to invest in carbon emission reduction efforts. Must the company cut expenses elsewhere in the business?

Great article Zach. Do you think ZEV credits create misleading financial data for investors when evaluating Tesla’s performance? Is it common knowledge in the investor community that Tesla’s profits are largely due to sales of ZEV credits? I personally think that the credits are great incentives to encourage companies to produce more zero emission vehicles, but I also see an opportunity for the system to be manipulated. If Tesla is selling credits at a cheaper rate than the market value, then isn’t that a manipulation of the system, which will not lead to more zero emission cars being sold?
Is Tesla really being rewarded for going above and beyond or is this Elon’s plan to have a monopoly over the zero emission vehicle industry? If Elon can convince the car manufactures to not invest in zero emission cars, but instead purchase his credits, doesn’t Elon’s action create an environment that hinders the competitiveness of the zero emissions cars industry? Therefore, I think CARB should limit the number of credits per company and CARB should set regulations on a minimum value for which the credits can be sold.