This past week-end, I wasted my time setting up two unlocked Blackberry Pearls for family members, and during this rousing process decided to add MMS to my unlocked iPhone – I needed a moment or two of telecommunicatory (I love making up new words!) release from the trials and tribulations of dealing with RIM’s bastard spawn.

So, on the iPhone I open up Settings, yada yada yada, blah blah blah, there is no place on the Network screen for me to enter the MMS settings! I know the phone is capable of handling MMS – I previously had SwirlyMMS installed, noted the enabled MMS settings, but refused to drop the $12+ large for the privilege of using something I should already have available to me. It’s the principle of the thing, man. Just because Apple has decided to hang out with the telecom Death Eaters on this side of the pond doesn’t mean that they should go all-in and act like Voldemort’s bitch. Or maybe it does. I mean, really. In my quest to resolve the issue (for, like, $0.00), I discovered through the power of Google that on some 2G iPhone, access to the MMS setting is available, on others, not so much, which translates into it being as easy to fix as pushing out a software update.

So come on, Apple. Show me the magic and make me happy with a little MMS loving on my iPhone. We’ll talk about you leaving Voldemort some other time because when I look in your eyes, I can see you’re not really happy, that you die a little death everytime someone questions why you two are even still together. You even got a new OS and upgraded yourself, but does Voldemort even care? “No! I don’t want to tether tonight! And no MMS either. I’ve had a hard day killing muggles and what not! Make me some dinner!” Apple, you don’t want that for the rest of your life. You deserve better than that. Don’t you? Come on, smile… Then leave his ass.

Step out of the box

We all know someone, or “someone who knows someone” that wants an iPhone, but refuses to willingly get in bed with the telecom company currently enjoying a monogamous US relationship with said object of desire.  (Apparently this thing is shaking it down with someone new in every town.)

The upshot thus far has been successful attempts to get the iPhone to stray from its domestic partner, to “explore” unknown pleasures with “others”, if you will.  The Pwnage that has led to this telecommunication cuckoldry has not fully sated the desires of those who lust after the iPhone’s many 3G charms.  Instead, this wicked jealousy has given rise to plots and schemes that would spirit the iPhone from its cramped, loveless quarters with promises of adventure and full-on sexy times.

With that in mind, I came across a quote, but I cannot remember the source at this moment, and I’m too lazy to look it up, that suggested T-Mobile lease some of Sprint’s 3G 1900/2100 MHz spectrum to make the iPhone fully functional on its network.  If Sprint actually has 3G spectrum in that bandwidth, and this scheme could actually work, that would be absolutely wonderful! (I like T-Mobile.) This would enable Apple and T-Mobile to gain some important intelligence on the viability of officially running the iPhone on T-Mob’s network.  They could gauge the iPhone’s use on its network with full 3G capabilities enabled through an on-going examination of their own parameters, as well as “listening” to the blogsphere and the mainstream media (which would eventually get round to writing articles based on select blog posts).

Judging by the backlash against That Other Telecom Co. through searches on Google and Twitter, there is substantial dissatisfaction and pent-up demand in the U.S. for the world’s greatest daily-use electronic device.  And judging by the number of unlocked iPhones all ready in use on T-Mob’s network (and no, I don’t have any verifiable data, just a hunch), there are a lot of people in this country with telecommunication itches that are just not being scratched.

The time has come for the iPhone to find a new partner, maybe try an open relationship or just go balls-deep in a 3G telecommunications orgy and let every able-bodied carrier have a go…

After they’ve had their fill of teabagging at their tea parties, and have verily shot their collective load, what’s next? Salad tossing parties?

How do you say "drop a dime" in French? Ok then, how about in German?

Looks like UBS struck a deal with US authorities that includes (1) payment to Uncle Sam for his troubles ($780 million) and (2) disclosure of private info on American clients who thought they were just out of the Tax Man’s reach.  And then they’re going to close the offshore accounts of their American clientele, you know, for shits & giggles.

This raises such a lot of operatic questions -  is the fat lady belting out her final aria and is she nearing the last note that signals the end of a banking era being the two most heard in these parts.  Such drastic, far reaching moves by UBS has undoubtedly raised the specter that the traditional role of Swiss banking as a haven for those chasing financial anonymity may not be long for this world.

It’s easy for me to sit here and say “good riddance” because I don’t have the kind of funds that would make a non-interest bearing account in the middle of Europe an attractive proposition.  Were I on the other side of the table as a full-fledged member of the financial patricians, my feelings might not be so plebeian.

But I’m not, so they are.

Plus, and this to me is the really important part, it sets a precedent for The Hague to go after the funds accumulated by all the corrupt Third World rulers (and some in the First and Second, too) who have stashed their ill-gotten gains in Swiss accounts while simultaneously giving their people the finger.

I, Hambricscurvus Maximus say: “Let The Games Begin!!!!!!!!  Release the Lions!!!!!”

How tired are you of listening to shills and mouthpieces for the status quo in executive pay for finance industry welfare kings?

This morning on Bloomberg TV, there was another one being interviewed about the new restrictions attached to the stimulus bill set to be signed into law later today in Denver by President Obama. I’m sure you’ve heard the reasoning against restricting the top pay in those businesses receiving financial assistance from the federal government.

The argument I’m hearing that grates the most is the threat that those in charge of these sinking ships being thrown tax-payer funded life savers will leave due to the new caps on top salaries. When will an interviewer follow up this statement with the simple question: “Where will they go?” Really, it’s hard to understand how that question doesn’t just flow out with an air of incredulity. It’s like watching some guy bluff in a game of 5 card draw when he’s only holding 2 cards. Makes you wonder if he really understands how the game is played, or if he knows that WE understand the rules of the game.

The next shill who voices those words really needs to be called to expand on this theory of brain drain. The only game left in town, so to speak, is Shanghai, where Wall Street bankers are being hired, but that’s probably so that down the road, when the global economy is recovering, the Chinese banks can swoop into New York with teams of experienced professionals ready to take control. Or at least, that’s one theory I heard. Otherwise, all this talk about offending the delicate financial sensibilities of the finance industry’s eliteis all just so Dubai.

Suck it, America!

Ever get the feeling you’ve been had?

Not content to rest on its laurels, Exxon Mobil beat its 2007 record high profit for a U.S. company.  XOM posted a new U.S. record $45.22 billion in profit for 2008 on what apparently was just a shitload of revenue.

“And we would also like to thank you, America.  Because without you, the little people, our dreams could never have become reality.  Again.”

Image: Reuters

Waiting for the Parade at the Newseum

Yesterday’s Inauguration of our 44th President was, of course, historic for many reasons, but it was extra special to me for one reason in particular. Seeing the 2 mile span of The Mall covered with a million people eager to participate in that historic event was awe inspiring.

Now it’s the morning of the first full day, and the real world requirements of the position must now weigh heavily on our new President’s shoulders, as they should. The burden looks especially heavy to me in light of the previous Administration’s lackluster performance. My blog, my opinion.

Yesterday, the market hit 14-year lows, which sets up the potential for strong gains for long term investors’ new investments  by virtue of the lower starting point. Or not. I mention this because of the parallel between the Bush and Obama administrations. The previous one was such a cumulative disaster that the comparative performance the new one has a strong shot at out-performance given its low starting base. Again, my blog, my opinion.

All the best to you, President Obama.  I hope that you and the market knock our socks off with solid upside performance that exceeds our collective expectations and hopes.

The following is a paper I wrote a few months ago to respond to the question what should the federal government do about the skyrocketing price of oil & gas. I’m pasting this now, because of tonight’s 60 Minutes report.

In recent months, the price of gasoline has set record after record on its seemingly unending upward surge.  The jump in price has ignited a debate in the US as people seek to understand why the price of gasoline is high and rising, and to determine what policy prescriptions are available to bring it back down to Earth.  The most popular explanations for rising prices have focused on the standard economic relation of gasoline’s supply and demand curves, the US dollar’s weakening performance against other major currencies and the impact on prices of speculation in the futures markets.  Logic and anecdotal evidence tends to support the argument that US demand for gasoline, in the face of apparent supply constraints, have led to a series of upward shits in the supply curve, resulting in the rising price per gallon.  The rising price of gasoline is further exacerbated (from the consumer’s perspective) by the oil companies’ firm grip on pricing power, as one would expect from an oligopolistic industry, and the widespread lack of viable alternatives. The result is a commodity with inelastic demand and consumers best described as price-takers.  Yet a closer look at the events revels the current price of gasoline may be due to increased speculation outside of government oversight.

In May 2008, the nationwide average price of gasoline stood at $3.60 per gallon, climbing above $4.00 by mid-June 2008.   John Moroney, an economics professor  at Texas A&M, asserts that supply constraints are at the heart of soaring gas prices, citing production declines in Mexico, an unstable oil industry in Venezuela and possible shrinking production capacity in the Middle East as supporting evidence.    If one adds to this the increased demand for oil and gasoline in Asia and rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, the conclusion that starts to emerge is that the global demand for oil (and by extension gasoline) has shifted outward, outstripping the commodity’s supply.  From a straight forward application of the economics of supply and demand, one would therefore expect the price of gasoline to rise under such circumstances.  According to the International Energy Agency, global oil demand in 2008 is expected to grow by 1.7 million barrels a day, up from 0.9 million in 2007, in spite of record prices and an economic slowdown in the US.   Under the circumstances, one would expect supply to increase as oil companies are able to tap previously uneconomic sources of oil, such as the oil sands in Canada, and deepwater sites in the Gulf of Mexico.

Another important factor that has contributed to rising gasoline prices in the United States is our currency’s declining value.  Oil, like many other commodities, is priced in US dollars and the dollar’s decline in this environment has benefited consumers based in relatively stronger currencies – Euro, Yen and GBP – as they can pay more per barrel in dollars without felling as much of an effect at the gasoline pump as is felt in the US.

Despite this evidence, there are those that share the opinion of Michael Lynch, president of Strategic Energy & Economic Research, Inc., who states “[t]he fundamentals don’t justify anywhere near these prices, even when you factor in geopolitical problems,”  adding that demand has begun to wane. On April 30, 2008, the Associated Press reported that although gasoline prices have followed crude prices upward, the rate of change has not been the same.  Because gasoline demand fell for several months, refiners were not able to raise gas prices fast enough to keep up with the rising cost of crude, which was up about 76% year-on-year compared to the 22% increase in gasoline prices during the same period.  Speculation in the futures markets for oil and gasoline is the additional factor believed to be a major driver of the upward surge in gasoline prices:  “[t]he price of crude oil is not made according to any traditional relation of supply to demand.  It is controlled by an elaborate financial market system,…” according to Mr. F. William Engdahal,  who goes on to estimate that “[a]s much as 60% of today’s crude oil price is pure speculation driven by large trader banks and hedge funds.”  At the root of this development is the change of trading platform for speculators in West Texas Intermediate crude futures contract.

In the US, the Commodities Future Trading Commission (CFTC) is tasked with “ensuring the integrity of the futures and options markets,” including the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX).  Traditionally, US futures contracts on West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil traded on exchanges, such as the NYMEX, subject to extensive regulatory oversight by the CFTC, including ongoing monitoring to detect and prevent price manipulation or fraud.   In 2000, the US Congress passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which exempted OTC electronic exchanges from CFTC oversight,  severely limiting the CFTC’s ability to ensure the integrity of the OTC electronic exchanges through ongoing monitoring to detect price manipulation or fraud.  In January 2006, the CFTC further relaxed its oversight abilities by allowing US-based traders to route orders for WTI futures contracts, as well as US gasoline and heating oil futures contracts, through the ICE futures exchange in London.   By Mr. Engdahl’s estimation, more than 60% of the price of crude oil as of May 2008 is due to speculation on OTC electronic exchanges outside the CFTC’s regulatory purview.  In early May 2008, the Associated Press reported the price of oil neared $124/barrel as “investors captivated by the market’s upward momentum looked past the government’s report of an increase in crude and gasoline supplies.

A roll-back of that portion of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 that exempted US-based OTC electronic exchanges from regulatory oversight is one viable policy prescription available to the government.  Such a move could potentially uncover manipulative or fraudulent activities related to pricing of oil and gasoline on US exchanges, and perhaps reduce price volatility through increased transparency.  A second, bolder remedy would be to restore the CFTCs oversight responsibility and authority with respect to US-based traders routing orders through OTC electronic exchanges, especially with respect to WTI, gasoline and heating oil futures contracts traded on London’s ICE.

Other remedies to lower the price of gasoline, such as the gas tax holiday and the increase of oil companies’ federal taxes, are unlikely to affect the price of gasoline as suggested by politicians.  If the federal tax paid at the pump were temporarily eliminated, politicians have intimated that the effect would be a one-for-one reduction of the consumer’s cost for gasoline.  Given the industry’s pricing power, which makes the consumer a price-taker, the more likely result would be a one-for-one increase in oil company profits.  Similarly, should Congress succeed in increasing the tax oil companies must pay, the pain would be passed on to the price-taking consumers, who would see the price of gasoline driven higher by the increased taxes.

In short, the government’s best route toward alleviate consumers’ pain at the pump is not to create new policies, but to undo two of their current ones.

Sources:

Chapman, Michael.  Pain at the Pump, Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business, May 2008.
Douglass, Elizabeth and Ronald White, Soaring costs are squeezing gas station owners too, Los Angeles Times, June 10, 2008.
Associated Press, Will oil prices continue to stay high?, April 25, 2008.
Blas, Javier and Neil Dennis.  Oil flirts with $110 as demand remains robust, FT.com, March 11, 2008.
Associated Press, Will oil prices continue to stay high?, April 25, 2008.
Mouawad, Jad. Oil Prices Pass Record Set in ‘80s, but Then Recede, The New York Times, March 3, 2008.
Associated Press, Will oil prices continue to stay high?, April 25, 2008.
Engdahl, William F., Speculators knock OPEC off oil-price perch, Asia Times, May 6, 2008.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Associated Press, Cost of oil nears $124 as gas starts to rise again, May 7, 2008

Guilty!

“Yer h0nor, the jury has reached a verdict:  We the jury find Gmail Tasks Guilty of being like buttah!  We ask, if it please the court, that Gmail be punished with excessive use given its flagrant act of deliciousness by enabling SMS in GTalk during the same week it drops the long-awaited and much-anticipated incorpration of a ToDo list in its supa-fwine email client.”

Hipster PDA

Just a real quick, short note about a monumental discovery I made last night: Gmail now has an integrated Tasks list! Oh sweet joy!