Link
Hungry? Click here! Clear Out the Event Log Your BlackBerry tracks absolutely everything it does Close Unused Applications Want to see what apps you’re running? Web Browser Running Slowly? Clear out the Cache You can make a dramatic increase in the speed of your Web Browser by clearing out the cache. Automatic Memory Cleaning Keep It Running Smoothly
24 Apr
Link
By Scott J. Wilson, Los Angeles Times April 22, 2012 Debt collectors calling? You have rights. • The debt collector must tell you — within five days of initial contact — the amount you owe, the name of the creditor and how you should proceed if you think you don’t owe the money. If you dispute the debt, send the collection agency a letter within 30 days saying so. Once the debt collection company receives your letter, it must stop trying to collect until it sends you written proof of the amount you owe. • Debt collectors may not call you before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. unless you say it’s OK. They may not call you at work if they know, or if you tell them, that your employer prohibits such calls. If you tell them to contact you only by mail or not to contact you at all, they must comply (it’s best to put your request in writing). If you have an attorney representing you over the debt, the collector must deal with the lawyer, not you. • Collection agents may not “harass, oppress or abuse you or any third parties they contact,” the Federal Trade Commission states. They may not threaten violence or harm, publish the name of debtors, use profanity or make repeated calls to annoy someone. ¿ Debt collectors are not permitted to lie in an attempt to get you to pay up. They can’t, for instance, say you have committed a crime or claim that they work for the government or for a credit reporting agency. ¿ Report problems with debt collectors to your state’s attorney general’s office (in California: oag.ca.gov/contact/select_comment_form) and to the FTC (www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov). If you feel your rights have been violated, you can sue a collector in state or federal court, but be sure to file within one year of the date of the violation
23 Apr
Link
The shareholder rejection of Citigroup’s executive compensation package leaves the company with few options—none of them good. It’s almost certain, in fact, that the company will be sued by shareholders, in this writer’s analysis. Part of the problem here is that Pandit has already been paid $15 million (plus retention awards potentially worth twice that much) under the compensation scheme rejected by shareholders. Citi [ C 35.08 +0.00 (+0.00%) ] shareholders, you see, were asked to approve last year’s pay package—so this is a retrospective vote. If Pandit doesn’t agree to give up pay he’s already received—and the odds of that happening are exceedingly long—the plaintiff’s attorneys will be filing lawsuits in short order. As DealBook’s Steven Davidoff explains: Citigroup may also face litigation. In a number of other cases, shareholder plaintiffs’ lawyers have sued after votes rebuffed pay packages, claiming that the board of directors breached its fiduciary duties or wasted corporate money by ignoring shareholders and paying excessive compensation. Citigroup is such a big target, the chances of it escaping such a suit are very low unless Mr. Pandit gives back all of this compensation. But I suspect that Mr. Pandit will not be in such a generous spirit. The potential success of such a suit is uncertain. So far, we have two major decisions addressing what the law is in these circumstances. One case involving Cincinnati Bell was allowed to go forward by a Federal District Court judge in Ohio. It remains to be seen if the plaintiffs will be successful, but merely by moving forward, the plaintiffs’ lawyers are likely to push Cincinnati Bell to a settlement to avoid costly litigation and possibly embarrassing disclosures. Another lawsuit involving Beazer Homes USA was dismissed by a Georgia state court in deference to the business judgment of the directors and the complex procedural grounds for such cases. The board at Citi could have avoided this altogether. It had advanced warning that its compensation package could be in trouble. Institutional Shareholder Services, the influential proxy advisor, recommended a “no” vote on Citigroup’s executive compensation package. Citi could have sought to negotiate a compensation package that I.S.S. would support—but chose to go ahead with the one it had in place. It’s not too much of a mystery why shareholders rejected the package. Citi’s stock is down 20 percent from a year ago, while the S&P is up more than 6 percent. Rival megabank JPMorgan Chase [ JPM 43.29 -0.61 (-1.39%) ] is down just 1.30 percent from a year ago—and its shareholders actually get a sizable dividend. Pandit is now saying it’s possible Citi won’t even try to pass the Federal Reserve’s stress tests—which it needs to do to raise its dividend—until next year. You can see why shareholders might not want to pay $15 million for this kind of performance. Citigroup is largely owned by institutional investors, such as pension funds and mutual funds. Collectively, institutional investors own 62 percent of the firm. The fact that Citi failed to get support for Pandit’s pay package means that at least some of these sophisticated institutions have turned against the board—at least on compensation. This wasn’t some sort of populist uprising of the “99 percent” voting against the “1 percent.” It was money turning against money. The “say on pay” vote—which was required under the Dodd-Frank reforms—is officially only an advisory plebiscite. This is the first time a major financial institution has seen shareholders reject a pay proposal. In many ways, it will be a test case for how Wall Street will respond to shareholders second-guessing how its executives are paid. Follow John on Twitter. (Market and financial news, adventures in New York City, plus whatever is on his mind.) You can email him at john.carney@nbcuni.com.
19 Apr
Link
changeinadvance:
18
Apr
changeinadvance:
Forbes Releases its Annual List of Hip hop’s Cash Cows for 2012. Check the list below:Forbes Top 5 List is Below:1. Sean “Diddy” Combs – $550 Million2. Shawn “Jay-Z” Carter – $460 Million3. Andre “Dr. Dre” Young – $270 Million4. Bryan “Birdman” Williams – $125 Million5. Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson -$100 Million
Earlier this week I posted the billionaire list from Forbes. This is the list of hip hops closest. In effect they are still in second place, aka the first losers. Now I’m being a jerk and poking a little fun but I sincerely respect their hustle. And you can hate hip hop, hate their pasts’- but you cant deny that it took hard work to get where hey are today. And of course some luck. But I’ve quoted many people here in this blog who have made it and its a consistent theme, progress, stardom, fame, it all works out when you put in the effort.
Everyone who got their ‘lucky break’ on this list put the work in. Jay-z had a business plan from the beginning. Smart man. When they began a corporate pursuit they put their designs on paper. Diddy danced his way up from the bottom. From back up dancer to MEga star and Entrepreneur extraordinaire the man put in many hours.
I could list accolades and my lists of what worked for them as i see it and every writer from Rolling Stone to XXL, but you get the point. Success Requires Work.
18
Apr
tee site
silverfreedom
tee pic and site
Changeinadvance 