Posted by Ian Holsman
Mon, 22 Jan 2007 04:56:00 GMT
In the age today the mentioned how a concert organizer is banning people bringing in the Australian flag, as gangs have now made the national flag a gang color.
This comes just after racial fights between Croats and Serbs (I think.. it was people whose parents come from the former Yugoslavia) at the Australian open, and the Lebanese/Australian brawls on Sydney’s beaches last year.
Sure.. Australians have never been as patriotic as Americans, but I think this is we have reached a new low.
There’s a problem in Australia with racism, no mater what the politicians say.
Tags australia, bigdayout, colors, gangs, racism | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Ian Holsman
Wed, 18 Oct 2006 03:32:00 GMT
With PBL getting $4.5b for selling it’s stake of channel nine, internet startups might have a new partner knocking on their door.
Sure.. I’m guessing most of that money is earmarked for gambling things, which is where PBL is focused, but the announcement also made mention of ‘new’ media… which means internet startups, and internet small companies.
One of the largest whines I’ve heard from Australian startup people is the lack of money available to fund startups (and hence why they are all moving to the US).
I think this is bullshit personally.
Australia has a superannuation contribution scheme which forces people to put at least 9% of there salary into investment funds (like a 401k). People can either elect to run their super fund themselves (which makes sense if you have more than $300k in it), or join a professional fund manager.
These funds are BIG. I was speaking to one fund manager who gets $1b of new funds a year. They are always on the lookout on ways to invest that, and startups are a good way to get a return which has a different risk profile than other investments (diversification of risk is what fund managers are after)
So what is the problem then.. people want money, people have money.. sounds like a perfect pair. Well.. speaking to a local VC, it seems that there are a couple of reasons.
1. Funds (LP’s) are not asking for a high enough return from local VC’s. This presents a problem as a low/medium return means you should be looking for things with a low/medium risk. By asking for a medium return for your money, it ties the hands of VCs, as they can’t fund a high-risk project without re-negoating with their LP’s.
2. The sales funnel is small. A way of countering a high risk project is with other high risk projects in different areas (diversifying and lowering your overall risk) so it matches the risk requirements of your LP. Because there isn’t many new projects coming up, or the ones which get proposed are very similar and facing similar risks it means they can’t get funded
3. Lack of experience. There are serial entrepreneurs in the US. people who have gone through it several times.. they know how to write a business plan, and what happens if you get funded.. To be fair, there are a couple of successful entrepreneurs in the internet space here, but they are still running their original businesses.
4. Lack of networking. I don’t think there is a place for people with ideas to meet each other, and swap war stories/experiences.
So why is Packer/PBL’s money any better ?
Well.. PBL is one of the companies who has the money, experience, and networks available to help. It is the ‘smart’ money that people always talk about. Here’s hoping they can start the virtuous circle going in Australia.
Posted in Business Related | Tags australia, PBL, startups, vc | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Ian Holsman
Tue, 30 May 2006 21:12:00 GMT
as a followup to the recent blog posts about the internet in australia, I thought i’d mention that
iiNet has just released a white paper detailing the myth of fiber to the node that Telstra is saying we need in order to get these speeds.
They claim we can already get 8Mbs with ordinary ADSL connections, and that telstra’s wholesale arm has artificially limited the speed to 1.5Mbs (in order to convince the government and the public to pay them 3-5billion to upgrade the network, and more importantly LOCK EVERY ONE ELSE OUT).
I’m not sure if they are claiming this or not (I just skimmed through the report), but I think they are also saying that when iiNet introduced their DSLAMs into the exchange all of a sudden the Telstra DSLAMs performed faster as well (page 7 and 8). nothing illegal here.. but ethical?
Posted in Business Related | Tags australia, economics, internet | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Ian Holsman
Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:31:00 GMT
was what the Australian Treasurer Peter Costello said Recently
and is the top headline in the local newspaper.
I found it interesting, as the ASF has been openenly trying to maintain the opposite policy for it’s community..
encouraging diversity and people with different values in order to grow, and not become stale.
Costello was refferring to religous radical muslims, but the ASF has got it’s fair share of disruptors, and groups with opposing viewpoints who don’t always see the same way either.
As the ASF further matures, I see us facing this decision sometime in the future as well. hopefully diversity will continue (in Australia and in the ASF)
Posted in General | Tags australia | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Ian Holsman
Sun, 04 Dec 2005 15:31:00 GMT
There has been a lot of talk lately about Australias tax system, and how screwed up it is. (isn’t every countries?)
the proposal I like best is called ‘30-30’ by John Humphreys
in a nutshell:
- 30,000 Tax free threshold
- 30% Tax rate above that
- with a sliding scale payment made to people earning below 30k
That’s it. no non-income related deductions. no allowances. no difference between a corporate or a individual.
nothing.
Sounds great, but it will have massive consequences.
First.. you would kill the tax-minimisation industry. you wouldn’t need a tax accountant to find all those deductions, or advise you on all the tax minimisation strategies, similiar to the rent vs buy one I highlighted earlier.
Second you would also kill the negative-gearing industry, whose whole purpose is to avoid tax.
So people using the tax break to subsidise their investment property will lose out, and either rents will increase to reflect the true cost of the property, and/or real estate prices will go down. personally I think both will happen, and investment properties will be priced to get a ‘standard’ return of X points about the bank interest rate to reflect the risk. (this needs to happen, but it will cause a lot of retiree’s to panic as their fixed income and net worth takes a nose dive)
Third impact the trades people and small business owners. These people claim deductions on nearly everything they buy. Car/Travel/Clothes.. all deductable, of the two builders I spoke to who were working on my house they claimed they paid a effective 6% tax rate. This will also affect the businesses that these people use the deductions on.. Car dealerships.
Forth impact. The average PAYE earners (the people who get a regular wage and tax is taken out straight away) These people are going to win out on this one, maybe this saving will make up for the increased rent they will have to pay, and the increase price small business owners and trades people are going to charge.
Fifth Impact. the government will have to change how it incentivives people to invest in long-term/low-return investments, like forest regrowth, the movie industry and R&D. (or maybe they will just finally admit that Australia doesn’t have to be good at everything, and leave it to the market)
I really like this tax proposal, but it is going to be a hard sell. The government needs to convince the wage slaves that they will be better off, to get support..
I hope they win. The distinction between a PAYE employee and a business owner is too damn large.
Update: corrected link to a more current description of the 30/30 deal.
Update2: Joshua Slive was correct. the paper says income-producing expenses can still be deducted.
Posted in Business Related | Tags australia, tax | 3 comments | no trackbacks