text:
5 International Banks With Big Fat Dividends

People invest in small and mid-cap stocks primarily because they offer more share and dividend growth potential than their bigger counterparts do. However, in terms of stability, bigger banks usually have a clear-cut edge over smaller ones, in part because they have a better chance of getting bailed out during difficult times. American banking giants such as JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM  ) and Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC  ) were bailed out during the financial crisis, and they're now back on track and reporting impressive earnings. Meanwhile, the number of small and regional U.S. banks appearing on the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s list of "problem banks" far exceeded the number of large banks.

What to look for
If you're on the hunt for some banking dividends, pay attention to the trailing yield, forward yield, and payout ratio. Big is good, of course, and I'd consider a dividend yield north of 2% to be healthy, provided the company has ample cash to reinvest and grow. But it's equally important to ensure that the payout is sustainable. Industry benchmarks suggest that a sustainable rate typically ranges between 2% and 5%. The payout ratio is an especially important metric because it compares the dividends paid with the net income the company generates.

Let's look at five big banks that offer both income and stability, as well as a chance to help guard your portfolio against unforeseen instability in the domestic markets.

5 chances to score

  1. Banco Santander (NYSE: STD  ) : Although Spain looks vulnerable at the moment, Santander looks strongly capitalized, with a yield that's among the highest in the industry. With quarterly net income growing sequentially, Santander looks good on the earnings front as well. It has an impressive trailing annual dividend yield of 5.50% and a current payout ratio of 63%, which is quite reasonable. The fact that Santander has been aggressively pursuing its expansion strategy shows that it isn't compromising on its growth plans and can comfortably continue making payouts at the same time.
  2. HSBC (NYSE: HBC  ) : The U.K's biggest bank has a trailing annual dividend yield of 2.90%, and its payout ratio stands at 47%. Declining loan losses enabled this banking behemoth to post a 53% jump in its latest quarterly earnings, further enabling HSBC to increase its quarterly dividend by 12.5%. This global bank looks like an attractive investment.
  3. Royal Bank of Canada (NYSE: RY  ) : Canadian banks have apparently dodged the financial crisis better than most of their U.S. counterparts have. The Toronto-based bank's dividend yield stands at 3.50%, and its payout ratio is 54%. It reported a 13% earnings increase in its latest quarter and subsequently raised its dividend. Fool colleague Ilan Moscovitz has shown that RBC is a dividend dynamo with strong fundamentals.
  4. Bank of Nova Scotia (NYSE: BNS  ) : This Canadian money-spinning stock offers a healthy dividend yield of 3.40% and has a relatively moderate payout ratio of 44%. It has a market cap of $65 billion and has manufactured top-line revenue pretty consistently over the years.
  5. Toronto-Dominion Bank (NYSE: TD  ) : Another Canadian giant that looks pretty darn attractive as far as income is concerned. It offers a lucrative dividend yield of 3.10%, and its payout ratio stands at 44%. But more importantly, it's doing great on the earnings and growth front. The bank recently acquired Chrysler Financial to expand its auto-lending business in North America.

The Foolish bottom line
These banking Goliaths are making money and offering their investors a similar opportunity. They look good from an income standpoint, and I don't see any reason they'd discontinue or even cut their dividends in the foreseeable future -- provided management doesn't goof up, of course.

Fool contributor Zeeshan Siddique owns none of the stocks mentioned in this article.

The Motley Fool owns shares of JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo and has created a ratio put spread position on Wells Fargo. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of Bank of Nova Scotia. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Read/Post Comments (0) | Recommend This Article (9)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

Be the first one to comment on this article.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1523798, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 7/29/2015 5:38:59 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated 8 hours ago Sponsored by:
DOW 17,630.27 189.68 1.09%
S&P 500 2,093.25 25.61 1.24%
NASD 5,089.21 49.43 0.98%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

7/28/2015 4:01 PM
BNS $47.50 Up +0.64 +1.37%
The Bank of Nova S… CAPS Rating: ****
HSBC $44.80 Up +0.91 +2.07%
HSBC Holdings plc… CAPS Rating: **
JPM $68.05 Up +0.04 +0.06%
JPMorgan Chase & C… CAPS Rating: ****
RY $56.96 Up +0.60 +1.06%
Royal Bank of Cana… CAPS Rating: ***
SAN $7.10 Up +0.07 +1.00%
Banco Santander Ce… CAPS Rating: ***
TD $39.57 Up +0.47 +1.20%
The Toronto-Domini… CAPS Rating: ****
WFC $57.40 Down -0.19 -0.33%
Wells Fargo CAPS Rating: *****


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Truncated: length

WARC-Type: response

text:
Have DOE Subsidies Failed the Energy Industry?

Don't let it get away!

Keep track of the stocks that matter to you.

Help yourself with the Fool's FREE and easy new watchlist service today.

The Department of Energy's financial handouts were supposed to help American companies gain a foothold in emerging industries and fuel manufacturing job growth. Solar power and battery technologies were the poster children and were expected to lead the way. President Obama visited plants and touted new jobs, and stocks hit the market with a great deal of enthusiasm.

The idea was great. Manufacturing companies can have a hard time getting the funding they need to expand, and if we don't push them along here, China will take over eventually. The problem is that some of the most highly touted government-backed companies have been failures. Bankruptcies, like Solyndra's, have given the DOE a black eye, and with electric vehicles selling more slowly than expected and solar prices falling, there's likely to be more bad news in the future.

Problem No. 1: Stimulus doesn't help adoption rates
A fundamental flaw in the DOE's plan was projections of how fast we would adopt new technologies and how fast the corresponding costs would fall. Invariably these two factors are linked, so when one fails, so does the other.

The battery market has been a prime example. Both Ener1 and A123 Systems (Nasdaq: AONE  ) received DOE grants to build out capacity in the U.S., and both have failed to live up to their potential. Ener1 has already filed bankruptcy, although its DOE-backed subsidiary EnerDel was left intact, and A123 Systems is in a world of hurt. How did we get here?

A123's problem has been underutilization of the immense amount of capacity the government helped the company build. Before the DOE grant took hold at the end of 2009, the company had 169.3 MW of capacity available, which was built up to 645.8 MW to end 2011. In the fourth quarter of 2011 the company shipped only 21.7 MW of batteries, which would have been 51% of the company's quarterly capacity in 2009. For the full year the company shipped 146.4 MW of batteries, still less than the 2009 capacity.

When you build out capacity too fast, plants, production lines, and workers sit underutilized, costing you money. This underutilization is why the company's losses have been growing despite increased revenue, while the stock is plunging to dangerously low levels.

All has not been lost, however. In the same round of funding that gave A123 Systems $249.1 million and EnerDel $118.5 million, the DOE also gave battery-related grants to General Motors (NYSE: GM  ) , Ford (NYSE: F  ) , and Polypore (NYSE: PPO  ) . These companies are profitable and are more likely to grow closer to the potential the DOE had in mind when grants were announced, even if the timeframe was longer than originally planned.

Problem No. 2: Betting on technology
When the DOE picked companies for its grants and loan guarantees, it was essentially making bets on each company's technology. That has been a public failure on the government's part, partly because it's extremely difficult to do. Even if you're an experienced venture capital firm you fail on most technology bets.

Solyndra's technology was cool, but it never competed with the falling cost of silicon-based solar modules from Asia. A123 and Ener1 still have strong technology, but adoption rates and costs couldn't keep up with the market. Where these companies failed, others will succeed.

Bets on technology may be the DOE's biggest mistake. The private markets are for high-risk projects, not government funding -- a lesson learned the hard way.

Wait, there are success stories?
DOE loans haven't been a complete failure. By all indications, Tesla Motors (Nasdaq: TSLA  ) is looking like a winner in the electric-vehicle market. Ford and Nissan have gotten federal loans to expand U.S. capacity for more fuel-efficient vehicles as well, which is driving sales. There may be failures in electric vehicles, but there will be successes, too.

Loan guarantees for electric power plants have also been successful. Plants built by First Solar and SunPower have been some of the largest recipients for these guarantees, and they help bring down funding costs for owners at little to no expense to taxpayers. Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, Energy Conversion Devices, Q-Cells, and others may get the headlines, but the solar market will live on with some of the companies assisted by the DOE.

The problem is, most of the money went to things like efficiency, carbon capture, solid waste recovery, etc. These aren't sexy, they don't create headlines, and they are unlikely to create the media buzz a bankruptcy might, even if they're successful.

Has the DOE's stimulus been a complete failure?
The one thing I've learned about renewable energy in the last few years is that without a financially sound base, there's little hope for a company. If solar products don't provide an attractive return for investors and electric-powered vehicles don't save enough fuel for consumers, they're simply not going to sell. And the goal is to end these subsidies eventually, so eventually a sustainable business must emerge.

The DOE gave grants and loan guarantees before the industry sorted out what technologies and what companies would be the winners and losers. Therefore there will be some black eyes on the program before all is said and done. Does that make it a failure? No, but it does make the investment questionable.

 What we may take away from this, more than anything, is that the government can incentivize behavior it wants to encourage, but investing in companies is a bad way to do that. Grants for cash-generating utility projects, tax incentives for investment, and investments in efficiency have paid off in many ways. But a few dings, no matter how small, on $34.5 billion in total awards can make a program look like a colossal failure, even if it has done some good in the energy industry.

The energy industry can be an intimidating place for some investors. But we've uncovered one winner that continues to benefit from rising oil prices. To get instant access to this report, "The Only Energy Stock You'll Ever Need," simply click here -- it's free.

Fool contributor Travis Hoium owns shares of SunPower in a personal account and a managed account. You can follow Travis on Twitter at @FlushDrawFool, check out his personal stock holdings, or follow his CAPS picks at TMFFlushDraw.

Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of First Solar, Tesla Motors, Ford Motor, General Motors, and Polypore International. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended creating a synthetic long position in Ford Motor. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days.

Read/Post Comments (1) | Recommend This Article (1)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On April 03, 2012, at 10:10 PM, iheartweimers wrote:

    I despise articles that treat the demise of A123

    Systems as a foregone conclusion, and you don't

    even mention the lawsuit announced today! Had

    you known about that, it would already be too late

    for the funeral were I to send flowers along with

    what little money I could salvage from shorting the

    stock. Fortunately, there is always the partnership

    with the Chinese automakers and contracts with

    the US military for vehicle batteries to use some of

    the excess capacity. So would you look into a

    merger with the Chinese as a possibility? I would

    think they would like to purchase the patents as

    they are not burdened with the fickleness of the

    spoiled consumer like we are in the U.S. They are

    planning on EVs as a set segment of the industry

    and are building infrastructure to support it.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1854253, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 7/29/2015 5:35:00 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Travis Hoium

Travis Hoium has been writing for since July 2010 and covers the solar industry, renewable energy, and gaming stocks among other things.

Today's Market

updated 8 hours ago Sponsored by:
DOW 17,630.27 189.68 1.09%
S&P 500 2,093.25 25.61 1.24%
NASD 5,089.21 49.43 0.98%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

12/31/1969 7:00 PM
AONEQ.DL $0.00 Down +0.00 +0.00%
A123 Systems CAPS Rating: **
F $14.83 Up +0.28 +1.92%
Ford CAPS Rating: ****
GM $31.32 Up +0.27 +0.87%
General Motors CAPS Rating: ***
PPO $60.14 Up +0.17 +0.28%
Polypore Internati… CAPS Rating: ***
TSLA $264.82 Up +11.81 +4.67%
Tesla Motors CAPS Rating: **

warcinfo:
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-236-191-2.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2015-32
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for August 2015
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf


text:
Interline Brands Meets on the Top Line, Misses Where It Counts

Interline Brands (NYSE: IBI  ) reported earnings on May 8. Here are the numbers you need to know.

The 10-second takeaway
For the quarter ended March 30 (Q1), Interline Brands met expectations on revenue and missed estimates on earnings per share.

Compared to the prior-year quarter, revenue improved and GAAP earnings per share increased.

Gross margin shrank, operating margin shrank, and net margin expanded.

Revenue details
Interline Brands chalked up revenue of $313.6 million. The four analysts polled by S&P Capital IQ expected net sales of $312.5 million on the same basis. GAAP reported sales were 5.4% higher than the prior-year quarter's $297.4 million.

Source: S&P Capital IQ. Quarterly periods. Dollar amounts in millions. Non-GAAP figures may vary to maintain comparability with estimates.

EPS details
EPS came in at $0.23. The four earnings estimates compiled by S&P Capital IQ forecast $0.25 per share. GAAP EPS of $0.23 for Q1 were 15% higher than the prior-year quarter's $0.20 per share.

Source: S&P Capital IQ. Quarterly periods. Non-GAAP figures may vary to maintain comparability with estimates.

Margin details
For the quarter, gross margin was 36.9%, 40 basis points worse than the prior-year quarter. Operating margin was 5.7%, 10 basis points worse than the prior-year quarter. Net margin was 2.4%, 10 basis points better than the prior-year quarter.

Looking ahead
Next quarter's average estimate for revenue is $331.1 million. On the bottom line, the average EPS estimate is $0.35.

Next year's average estimate for revenue is $1.30 billion. The average EPS estimate is $1.30.

Investor sentiment
The stock has a two-star rating (out of five) at Motley Fool CAPS. Among 17 CAPS All-Star picks (recommendations by the highest-ranked CAPS members), 13 give Interline Brands a green thumbs-up, and four give it a red thumbs-down.

Of Wall Street recommendations tracked by S&P Capital IQ, the average opinion on Interline Brands is outperform, with an average price target of $25.00.

Over the decades, small-cap stocks like Interline Brands have provided market-beating returns, provided they're value-priced and have solid businesses. Read about a pair of companies with a lock on their markets in "Too Small to Fail: Two Small Caps the Government Won't Let Go Broke." Click here for instant access to this free report.

Seth Jayson had no position in any company mentioned here at the time of publication. You can view his stock holdings here. He is co-advisor of Motley Fool Hidden Gems, which provides new small-cap ideas every month, backed by a real-money portfolio. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Read/Post Comments (0) | Recommend This Article (0)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

Be the first one to comment on this article.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1892127, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 7/29/2015 5:51:44 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Seth Jayson

Today's Market

updated 8 hours ago Sponsored by:
DOW 17,630.27 189.68 1.09%
S&P 500 2,093.25 25.61 1.24%
NASD 5,089.21 49.43 0.98%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

12/31/1969 7:00 PM
IBI $0.00 Down +0.00 +0.00%
Interline Brands,… CAPS Rating: No stars


text:
Ask a Fool: Our Microsoft Stock Analysis

In this edition of The Motley Fool's "Ask a Fool" series, Motley Fool analysts Jason Moser and Brendan Mathews take a question from a reader who writes, "What are your thoughts on Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT  ) ? I bought for $17 per share during the Great Recession and added a couple of years ago at $28. A lot of folks do not like it.  But, it keeps climbing higher, and it is a great dividend payer."

Brendan notes there are risks with Microsoft. It's got a culture of bureacracy, a new CEO, and it spends a huge amount on research and development, without much to show for it. That said, the company has a great competitive advantage, great margins, and it does pay a nice dividend. Jason thinks it's likely to be a steady dividend payer going forward, and it's not a bad stock for your portfolio if that's what you're looking for.

Both think the stock is somewhat underappreciated among investors, it could be a market beater going forward, if you include its rising dividend. However, it's not without risk of disruption from Google (NASDAQ: GOOGL  ) (NASDAQ: GOOG  ) and others, particularly its consumer business.

Will this stock be your next multibagger?
Give me five minutes and I'll show how you could own the best stock for 2014. Every year, The Motley Fool's chief investment officer hand-picks one stock with outstanding potential. But it's not just any run-of-the-mill company. It's a stock perfectly positioned to cash in on one of the upcoming year's most lucrative trends. Last year, his pick skyrocketed 134%. And previous top picks have gained upwards of 908%, 1,252%, and 1,303% over the subsequent years! Believe me, you don't want to miss what could be his biggest winner yet! Just click here to download your free copy of "The Motley Fool's Top Stock for 2014" today.

Read/Post Comments (0) | Recommend This Article (3)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

Be the first one to comment on this article.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2951296, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 7/29/2015 5:47:59 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Brendan Mathews

A Fool since 2005, Brendan is a research analyst on The Motley Fool's Stock Advisor newsletter. He enjoys scouring financial statements, pontificating on competitive advantage, and any outdoor activity.

Today's Market

updated 8 hours ago Sponsored by:
DOW 17,630.27 189.68 1.09%
S&P 500 2,093.25 25.61 1.24%
NASD 5,089.21 49.43 0.98%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

7/28/2015 4:00 PM
GOOG $628.00 Up +0.74 +0.12%
Google (C shares) CAPS Rating: ****
GOOGL $659.66 Up +1.39 +0.21%
Google (A shares) CAPS Rating: ****
MSFT $45.34 Down -0.01 -0.02%
Microsoft CAPS Rating: ***


text:
10 Ways to Save on Air Conditioning Costs That Will Keep the Heat Off Your Energy Bill

Summer is right around the corner, which means endless sunshine, barbecues, travel, and pool parties. For people hoping to beat the heat this summer, it might be time for you to think about purchasing an air conditioner or replacing your old unit.

While there are cheaper ways to cool down — fans, staying hydrated, closing the curtains — in the summer heat, nothing beats the chill of an air conditioner. According to the U.S. Energy Department, two-thirds of all U.S. homes have an air conditioning unit. Air conditioners use about 5 percent of all the electricity produced in America at an annual cost of more than $11 billion to homeowners.

Operating much like a refrigerator, air conditioners use energy, typically electricity, to transfer heat from the interior of your home to the outside environment. To cool an area, air conditioners must be able to lower air temperature, remove air moisture, and filter the air. As cool as an air conditioner is — literally — using a unit during the hot summer months will definitely take a big bite out of your energy bill. Save on the costs of air conditioning by following these tips.

1. Replace your old unit
If your AC system is more than 10 years old or not keeping your home as cool as it once did, it might be time to replace it. While the cost of buying a new unit will initially put a dent in your wallet, your savings over time will be more than worth it. Replacing your AC with an ENERGY STAR unit could cut your annual energy bill by nearly $200. Before replacing your unit, though, make sure that the lack of cooling isn't due to a leak in your house or another problem.

2. Proper installation
Replacing your old cooling unit with a newer model is great, but to get the maximum benefits of an energy-efficient unit you need to have it properly installed. Improper installation of a unit can reduce efficiency by up to 30 percent, according to Energy Star.

3. Change your air filter
By checking your air filter every month, especially during months when your AC is heavily used, can save you energy costs. If the filter is dirty, change it. Dirty filters slow air flow, which makes it harder for your system to keep you cool and reduces your unit's efficiency. You should change your filter at least every three months.

4. Set up a programmable thermostat
If your central air is controlled by a thermostat, install a programmable one to save energy. When you are out of the house, increase the heat controlled by your cooling system a few degrees to shave off between 5-20 percent of your energy bill. Properly using pre-programmed settings on a programmable thermostat can save you about $180 every year in energy costs.

5. Install ceiling fans
Fans are a surefire way to cool down during the hot summer months. Fans can make you feel anywhere from 3-8 degrees cooler, which means you can increase the temperature at which your AC will blast air — saving on energy costs.

6. Remember Mother Nature

Heat enters a house from the sun shining through the roof or windows. The more trees or shrubs you have surrounding your home, the less likely the sun will be able to reach inside your abode. A cooler home means you will be use the AC less.

7. Cover your windows
Solar or mesh window screens and window films will intercept some of the energy from the sun before it enters your house. Window awnings can reduce solar heat in the summer by up to 77 percent, according to the Energy Department. Blinds are effective at reducing summer heat (moreso than gaining heat during the winter months). If you have drapes on windows, be sure to close them. Medium-colored draperies with white-plastic backings can reduce heat gains by 33 percent. The more heat you can prevent from entering your home, the cheaper your energy bill will be.

8. Avoid the stove
Boiling something on the stove or baking something in the oven will only increase indoor heat and cause you to run the AC. Eat something cool like a salad or use the microwave. If you have to use the stove, cook in the evening when temperatures are cooler. After you cook be sure to turn on the kitchen exhaust. The cooler you can keep your home, the better so that you don't have to run the AC too long or too often.

9. Cool one room
If a central air system is just too expensive, a small window unit will help you beat the heat. Cooling one room with a window AC unit will use much less energy than a central system. To figure out the right unit for your room, take a look at this guide by Energy Star.

10. Don't get an oversized unit
Many people want to buy the biggest AC unit available with the mind-set that it will provide the best cooling. But an AC that's oversized is both inefficient and a huge waste of money. An AC that's too big will cool down the room too quickly before it has reached its maximum efficiency level. It will cool the room, but only remove some of the humidity, leaving it damp and feeling clammy. Make sure to get a unit that's the right size for your room.

Do you know this energy tax "loophole"?
You already know record oil and natural gas production is changing the lives of millions of Americans. But what you probably haven't heard is that the IRS is encouraging investors to support our growing energy renaissance, offering you a tax loophole to invest in some of America's greatest energy companies. Take advantage of this profitable opportunity by grabbing your brand-new special report, "The IRS Is Daring You to Make This Investment Now!," and you'll learn about the simple strategy to take advantage of a little-known IRS rule. Don't miss out on advice that could help you cut taxes for decades to come. Click here to learn more.

This article 10 Ways to Save on Air Conditioning Costs That Will Keep the Heat Off Your Energy Bill originally appeared on My Bank Tracker.

Read/Post Comments (3) | Recommend This Article (0)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On August 04, 2014, at 6:42 PM, hanpage18 wrote:

    I think it is important to try to save money anyway you can. People don't need to be obsessed with it but the small things you can do each day can really make a difference. These are all simple ways to save on air conditioning that i am definitely going to use.

    Hannah |

  • Report this Comment On April 22, 2015, at 4:44 PM, elibaine wrote:

    This is some of the best advice I've read for saving money on your air conditioner. If you want to save money on any of your bills you are going to need diligence and cooperation from the whole household. A programmable thermostat is, as you say, SO useful because it requires less attention to regulate. I have roommates who don't always agree on the temperature; so the poor thermostat gets changed too frequently. I have been told that moving it around a lot costs more than keeping it on a higher level. I'd love to see the numbers behind that to prove it so we can put an end to the confusion in my apartment.

    Eli |

  • Report this Comment On April 24, 2015, at 2:14 AM, gagebrewer wrote:

    Regular maintenance of air-conditioner is very helpful to save some money on air-conditioning electric bill.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2986302, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 7/29/2015 5:48:46 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

MyBankTracker is an independent resource that helps consumers make smarter banking and money decisions.

Today's Market

updated 8 hours ago Sponsored by:
DOW 17,630.27 189.68 1.09%
S&P 500 2,093.25 25.61 1.24%
NASD 5,089.21 49.43 0.98%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes


text:
Silva a doubt for derby day

Manchester City star David Silva is a doubt for the Manchester derby and has been ruled out of Tuesday's UEFA Champions League clash with Borussia Dortmund.

Last Updated: 04/12/12 at 00:34 Post Comment

David Silva: The playmaker has been ruled out of meeting with Borussia Dortmund

David Silva: The playmaker has been ruled out of meeting with Borussia Dortmund

Manager Roberto Mancini confirmed the Spaniard has not travelled to Germany with the rest of the squad for the final Group D match at the Westfalenstadion due to a hamstring injury.

City will now hope the 26-year-old can recover in time to feature in Sunday's eagerly anticipated top-of-the-table Premier League encounter with Manchester United.

Mancini said: "It's a hamstring. We don't know if he can recover for the derby. We will try."

City are also without midfield inspiration Yaya Toure, who is suspended for Tuesday's match against Dortmund.

Mancini's side are already eliminated from the Champions League and need to win in Germany to stand any chance of securing a consolation place in the Europa League.

There is a feeling City might be better served in their Premier League title defence by being out of Europe altogether but Mancini has disputed that.

The Italian also insists the upcoming derby against United has not clouded his thinking for the Dortmund game.

Mancini said on Monday: "We are a good team. We are a good club. We want to play well tomorrow and try to win.

"We have brought here all the players that are available. The other players that stay at home are injured. The players that are here will do everything to win this game.

"It will be difficult because I think in this moment Borussia are one of the best teams in Europe."

Related News

Most Commented

Readers' Comments

t's only a matter of time before one of them throws in a yo mamma

Jose hits back at Rafa's wife

ll you need to know about Jose's 'class' right there. Thin skinned, ungracious, bully

voice of season
Jose hits back at Rafa's wife

f Jose left a mess at Inter Milan then Rafa cleaned it up with a hand grenade and a bag of compost

Benitez 'tidying up Mourinho's messes'

Footer 365

Muller has a job for life at Bayern

Chairman Karl-Heinz Rummenigge feels that Thomas Muller 'will never leave ' Bayern Munich and has offered the forward a job for life at the club.

Jose Mourinho: Rafael Benitez destroyed Inter Milan and his wife should take care of his diet

Jose Mourinho has hit back at Rafael Benitez’s wife, saying her husband 'destroyed' Inter Milan and she should take care of his diet.

Jose Mourinho: 'We can make Falcao score goals again'

Jose Mourinho is convinced that he can make Radamel Falcao score goals again despite his nightmare season at United.

Mail Box

Mails: Let's Talk About Jose's Failures...

We don't talk about them because Chelsea won the title...but imagine if LVG or Brendan Rodgers had signed Juan Cuadrado. Plus, a trawl through the squads...

Di Maria Just Didn't Fit (S**t Happens)

If a signing doesn't work there doesn't have to be a massive witch hunt. So there. Plus a detailed net spend rant, Breel Embolo, computer games and Louis van Gaal...

© 2015 Sky Ltd. All Rights Reserved A Sky Sports Digital Media company


text:
Sturridge developing as England's best

Ahead of Liverpool's date with Manchester United, Peter Fraser looks at Daniel Sturridge's development into England's most prolific goalscorer.

Last Updated: 01/09/13 at 07:17 Post Comment

Daniel Sturridge: The striker has thrived under the faith of Brendan Rodgers

Daniel Sturridge: The striker has thrived under the faith of Brendan Rodgers

It was a representation of Sturridge's significant rise to prominence. Speaking on this week's Monday Night Football when analysing Liverpool's weekend win over Aston Villa, Sky Sports expert Jamie Carragher said of his former team-mate: "For me, he is England's best striker."

That Sturridge is being talked about as one of his country's great hopes in a potential World Cup season demonstrates how he has turned his career around. Having previously appeared set to be a youth star who failed to fulfil potential, he is now a feared frontman in the Premier League.

On Sunday, Sturridge will again face Manchester United. He made his Liverpool Premier League debut at Old Trafford in January, scoring as a half-time substitute in a 2-1 defeat for his new club. Ahead of this weekend's rematch, this time at Anfield, his development has become clear.

The 23-year-old is answering his critics. Questions surrounded the £12million fee Liverpool paid to Chelsea in this winter's transfer window while there were also doubts based on inaccurate assumptions regarding a spikey attitude, selfish nature on the pitch, and an overreliance on his left foot.

But 12 goals in 16 Premier League appearances for Liverpool is validation in itself. It has ensured the 10-game ban of Luis Suarez has not proved too much of a handicap on the pitch while the manner in which Sturridge has embraced the team-spirit mantra of manager Brendan Rodgers has also been a huge positive.

Daniel Sturridge, Premier League - Liverpool
Season2013/142012/13Liverpool Career
Minutes Played18010921272
Goals Scored21012
Minutes per Goal90109.2106
Shots On Target42832
Shots Off Target32528

Sturridge has particularly made a flying start to this season after scoring four goals in three games. Not only that, they have been important, decisive goals, including winners over Stoke City and Villa - which first demonstrated his clinical finishing from long range and then showcased his quick feet inside the penalty area. In the midweek Capital One Cup win over Notts County, he scored twice.

His goals - including against former club Chelsea last season - have been a key factor in Liverpool's current run, which dates back to the past campaign, of having lost just once in all competitions in 16 games. And Carragher this week explained of Sturridge: "He came in in January and was a breath of fresh air for Liverpool. He was exactly what we needed. You saw in that first game at Old Trafford, he was there and he and Suarez looked like a partnership.

"Now Suarez is out, at the back end of last season and start of this season, people were talking, 'Can he [Sturridge] replace Suarez?'. Liverpool are unbeaten in the last 10 games and Suarez has played in five or six. It is down to this fella' [Sturridge] getting the goals. For me, he is now showing everyone. He just needed a chance."

That opportunity to play as a main striker, which Sturridge was largely denied at Chelsea - where he was pushed out to the right flank, appears to be the key. Having been given the backing of Rodgers, he has eclipsed the Premier League goalscoring of his fellow strikers in Roy Hodgson's current England squad, Jermain Defoe (one), Danny Welbeck (two), Wayne Rooney (five) and Rickie Lambert (eight), in 2013.

England strikers Premier League record in 2013
Jermain Defoe1681
Rickie Lambert21208
Wayne Rooney15115
Danny Welbeck1582

Sturridge's start to the new campaign is all the more noteworthy when it is remembered he did not have a proper pre-season as a result of the ankle injury he suffered while playing for England against Republic of Ireland at the end of May. It is a reflection of his high level of natural fitness, which, ironically, has been honed over the years from playing in his less favoured wide areas.

In March 2012, Sturridge himself said: "Fitness-wise, it helps you so much playing on the wing, as it is a completely different job. You do a lot more runs than you do up front. Thierry Henry played wide for Juventus and then went to Arsenal and played as a centre-forward."

But fitness is just a part of the overall football ability which Birmingham-born Sturridge - a nephew of former Derby County star Dean Sturridge - has always possessed since the very early years of his career.

After a spell with hometown club Aston Villa and a year at Coventry City, he joined Manchester City's Academy as a 13-year-old in 2003. In 2004, he was voted Manchester City's Player of the Season and was their leading scoring as they won the Nike Cup, the world's largest Under 15 tournament.

Sturridge would also score goals in the FA Youth Cup final for Manchester City in 2006 as they suffered a narrow defeat by Liverpool over two legs before then signing a professional contract. He would make his first-team debut in 2007.

The 2007/08 season was then one to remember as he scored his maiden first-team goal in an FA Cup tie against Sheffield United closely followed by his first league goal versus Derby. Another goal in an FA Youth Cup final - this time in the first leg as City went on to defeat Chelsea - meant Sturridge was a record-breaker as the first player to score in the Youth Cup, FA Cup and Premier League in the same campaign.

Sturridge joined Chelsea in July 2009, when a transfer tribunal was required to settle the deal with Manchester City. But he was a frustrating figure in his time at Stamford Bridge, despite an impressive loan spell at Bolton, which began in January 2011, when he scored eight goals in 12 games.

He returned to Chelsea for 2011/12 hoping to become a main striker but manager Andre Villas-Boas and eventual predecessors Roberto Di Matteo and Rafa Benitez all had other ideas in pushing the left-footer out to the right wing.

Although he scored twice for Great Britain as their main striker in the following summer at the 2012 London Olympics having suffered from suspected viral meningitis in the build-up, Sturridge also failed to overly convince in the Games. He memorably fluffed the losing penalty in the quarter-final shoot-out defeat by South Korea.

But Liverpool and Rodgers, having monitored Sturridge's career from afar, decided to pay big money this January in the confidence they could give him the spotlight in which his potential thrived.

Indeed, Rodgers said at the time of the signing: "I have known Daniel since he was 12 at Coventry and then coming through the ranks at Manchester City. He can score, he has pace and power. He is also hungry, and what we need at Liverpool is players hungry to do well. He recognises this might be his chance at a big club and he has to produce. I am looking forward to working with him."

It does, of course, remain early in Sturridge's career, he is probably still too dependent on his left foot, and there is time for a blip in form. But he is certainly currently producing as requested by Rodgers. The ease and speed with which he has struck up a connection with his Liverpool team-mates is nothing short of phenomenal.

Two goals in last season's 6-0 humiliation of Newcastle United at St James' Park and also a hat-trick in the win at Fulham have been particular highlights. But, at the same time, both those games came while Suarez was suspended to suggest the pair may struggle to work in tandem when the Uruguayan returns.

Sturridge and fellow January signing, Brazilian playmaker Coutinho, clearly relish playing together in Suarez's absence as witnessed in the way they linked up for the former's first goal at Newcastle. But Sturridge and Suarez in fact also work well as a pair and that was evident in the manner in which they assisted each other for goals in the 2-2 draw against Chelsea at Anfield.

If, as appears to be the case, Suarez does not leave before the transfer deadline, the challenge for Rodgers will be to fit the controversial South American, Sturridge and Countinho into the same team when the former returns from his ban, which was incurred after that Chelsea game, at the end of September.

There is a case to argue that Sturridge's shooting accuracy of better than 50 per cent since joining Liverpool gives him the right to be the main striker with Suarez and Coutinho playing in behind as supporting roles. This could also give Suarez even greater freedom to do his talking with his football skill in a deeper role.

But, in Sturridge, Liverpool undoubtedly have a major weapon in their armoury as they prepare to face old rivals United. If he continues to show his goalscoring talent, works hard and remains focused, he can become the main man for Liverpool and England.

Liverpool versus Manchester United is live on Sky Sports 1 HD and 3D on Sunday at 12.30pm

TEAMtalk Facebook Fan Page

The TEAMtalk fan page is a great place to meet like minded people, have football related discussions and make new friends.

Footer 365

Jose Mourinho: Rafael Benitez destroyed Inter Milan and his wife should take care of his diet

Jose Mourinho has hit back at Rafael Benitez’s wife, saying her husband 'destroyed' Inter Milan and she should take care of his diet.

Jose Mourinho: 'We can make Falcao score goals again'

Jose Mourinho is convinced that he can make Radamel Falcao score goals again despite his nightmare season at United.

Arsene Wenger responds to Jose Mourinho taunt

Arsene Wenger has brushed off Jose Mourinho's latest taunts after the Chelsea boss said the Gunners' recent spending may come as "a surprise".

Mail Box

Mails: Let's Talk About Jose's Failures...

We don't talk about them because Chelsea won the title...but imagine if LVG or Brendan Rodgers had signed Juan Cuadrado. Plus, a trawl through the squads...

Di Maria Just Didn't Fit (S**t Happens)

If a signing doesn't work there doesn't have to be a massive witch hunt. So there. Plus a detailed net spend rant, Breel Embolo, computer games and Louis van Gaal...

© 2015 Sky Ltd. All Rights Reserved A Sky Sports Digital Media company


text:
Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Most Recent FO Features

» Quarterbacks and Salary

Aaron Rodgers is the best quarterback in the NFL, and should be the highest-paid. We can all agree on that. But this guest column by Kevin Kolbe explains why salaries for other quarterbacks are all out of whack.

24 Sep 2005

1999 DVOA Ratings and Commentary

by Aaron Schatz

For the past few months, five years worth of DVOA have been available on our website: 2000-2004.  But since the end of last season, you may have noticed me occasionally mention ratings from 1998 and 1999.  I was not able to fully analyze those seasons until this past off-season, and two months ago I published the ratings for 1998. The 1999 ratings were supposed to come two weeks later, but the book tour for PFP 2005 and other circumstances have kept me so busy that I couldn't finish my write-up. With Tennessee and St. Louis meeting this weekend in a rematch of that season's Super Bowl, this seems like the perfect time to look back at 1999: The Year of the Rams.

1999 was a year of change, with only one team from the previous year's top six finishing in 1999's top six. If you are waiting for me to reveal that some other team actually had a higher DVOA than St. Louis in 1999, well, keep waiting.  1999 is one of the three seasons where the top team in DVOA took home the Super Bowl title as well (the others are 2002 and 2004) and the Rams dominated the NFL all season. St. Louis's rating was double that of every other team except for the 14-2 Jacksonville Jaguars, and the Rams had that rating despite sitting their starters in the final week of the season and putting up their worst single-game rating of the year.

Before commentary, let's look at the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings for 1999, measured by our proprietary Value Over Average (VOA) system that breaks down every single play and compares a team's performance to the league averaged based on situation in order to determine value over average.  (Explained further here.)

DVOA represents adjusted statistics.  OFFENSE and DEFENSE DVOA are adjusted for opponent quality and to consider all fumbles, kept or lost, as equal value.  SPECIAL DVOA is adjusted for type of stadium (warm, cold, dome, Denver) and week of season.  NON-ADJ TOTAL VOA does not include these adjustments.  DVOA is a better indicator of team quality.  VOA is a better indicator of actual wins.  WEIGHTED DVOA gives a stronger consideration to games late in the season.  Remember that, as always, defense is better when it is NEGATIVE. LAST YEAR represents rank in 1998.

1 STL 42.2% 13-3 24 50.8% 33.3% 1 18.3% 1 -21.3% 4 2.6% 9
2 JAC 32.7% 14-2 10 41.0% 22.1% 5 4.9% 9 -21.1% 5 6.7% 2
3 TEN 21.0% 13-3 14 26.1% 23.7% 3 8.8% 6 -8.5% 18 3.7% 4
4 OAK 20.5% 8-8 23 14.0% 24.2% 2 15.9% 2 -10.4% 13 -5.8% 28
5 DAL 17.7% 8-8 6 23.5% 22.0% 6 -0.3% 11 -15.0% 8 3.1% 7
6 KC 17.6% 9-7 17 22.2% 13.9% 10 5.5% 8 -16.6% 6 -4.5% 26
7 BUF 14.4% 11-5 8 17.1% 16.3% 8 7.3% 7 -9.6% 14 -2.5% 24
8 NYJ 12.3% 8-8 3 9.1% 20.8% 7 -2.2% 12 -12.7% 11 1.8% 11
9 MIA 9.8% 9-7 7 6.3% 4.7% 16 -10.2% 21 -16.0% 7 4.0% 3
10 MIN 9.7% 10-6 4 10.0% 22.5% 4 10.2% 4 3.3% 25 2.8% 8
11 SEA 9.6% 9-7 13 5.8% 10.6% 12 -5.4% 15 -13.7% 9 1.3% 13
12 WAS 7.5% 10-6 26 17.8% -4.3% 20 11.5% 3 -0.2% 22 -4.2% 25
13 PIT 6.1% 6-10 19 8.3% 1.2% 17 -9.1% 19 -11.7% 12 3.5% 6
14 DEN 5.7% 6-10 2 -2.9% 15.6% 9 -3.1% 13 -9.3% 15 -0.5% 18
15 TB 5.1% 11-5 11 -1.3% 12.8% 11 -21.4% 26 -22.8% 3 3.6% 5
16 DET 3.6% 8-8 15 10.0% 6.0% 15 -3.3% 14 -6.6% 19 0.3% 16
17 GB 3.0% 8-8 9 3.5% -7.3% 22 -7.4% 16 -9.3% 16 1.2% 14
18 BAL 2.9% 8-8 20 0.2% 8.0% 13 -25.2% 27 -28.0% 1 0.2% 17
19 CAR 2.4% 8-8 25 2.1% 7.0% 14 4.8% 10 10.7% 27 8.4% 1
20 NE -4.2% 8-8 12 -0.4% -15.0% 24 -15.4% 24 -9.0% 17 2.2% 10
21 IND -5.3% 13-3 28 -0.4% -1.3% 18 9.0% 5 13.7% 29 -0.5% 19
22 NYG -7.3% 7-9 16 -10.5% -7.0% 21 -9.7% 20 -4.4% 20 -2.0% 23
23 PHI -10.1% 5-11 29 -18.2% -2.5% 19 -31.9% 30 -22.9% 2 -1.0% 21
24 ATL -12.9% 5-11 1 -20.5% -12.9% 23 -12.6% 23 -0.6% 21 -0.8% 20
25 SD -13.8% 8-8 27 -14.6% -22.1% 27 -28.2% 29 -12.8% 10 1.6% 12
26 CHI -14.0% 6-10 18 -19.5% -16.4% 25 -8.6% 17 4.0% 26 -1.3% 22
27 CIN -28.9% 4-12 30 -25.6% -19.7% 26 -11.1% 22 10.8% 28 -7.0% 29
28 SF -30.7% 4-12 5 -31.4% -38.1% 29 -8.8% 18 14.5% 30 -7.5% 31
29 NO -35.0% 3-13 22 -30.0% -40.0% 31 -27.5% 28 2.3% 24 -5.2% 27
30 ARI -35.6% 6-10 21 -40.1% -30.4% 28 -35.9% 31 0.7% 23 1.0% 15
31 CLE -46.6% 2-14 x -49.5% -38.4% 30 -20.9% 25 18.4% 31 -7.3% 30

First, let's get this out of the way: Because I wanted to get this commentary written this weekend, the tables are not yet on the website with the individual player stats for either 1998 or 1999. Those will go up when I do a special 1998-1999 mailbag answering questions from the 1998 discussion thread as well as this discussion thread. (I have 1997 data now as well, but likely won't be able to break it down and create DVOA until next summer.)

As you might expect, the Rams had the league's top offense with the debut of the Greatest Show on Turf. What's interesting, however, is how unimpressive that top offense was compared to the top offenses of the last few years. Check out last year's offensive ratings and you'll see that five teams were higher than the 1999 Rams. It turns out that the general offensive level of the NFL jumped just as much in 2000 as it did in 2004. The DVOA ratings currently use a baseline of 2002-2003, with those two years adding to 0%. The total league DVOA for 1999 was -6.4%, by far the lowest of any of the seven seasons I've analyzed so far.

As good as the Rams' offense was, it looked even better because of strength of schedule. You'll notice that the Rams' non-adjusted rating (VOA) is even better than their adjusted rating (DVOA), and that's almost entirely because of the poor defenses faced by Kurt Warner and crew.  Strength of schedule drops the Rams offense from 25.3% VOA to 18.3% DVOA. The difference between the Rams' unadjusted defense (-22.0% VOA) and adjusted defense (-21.3% VOA) is much smaller. Put it all together, though, and the average DVOA of a St. Louis opponent was by far the worst in the league:

1999 Easiest Schedules
(Average Opponent DVOA)

STL -13.6%
JAC -8.4%
DAL -6.2%
CAR -5.7%
WAS -4.0%

Looking at the rest of the NFL, for the most part the 1999 ratings match the 1999 records, and most of the teams with records out of line with these ratings moved in line with DVOA the next year. Oakland was 8-8 despite finishing third in DVOA, then improved to 12-4 the next year. Defending champion Denver went 6-10 mostly due to luck, and bounced back to 11-5 the next year. Like Denver, Pittsburgh finished 6-10 despite a positive DVOA; the Steelers were 9-7 the next year and 13-3 the year after.

Interestingly enough, the two teams whose improvement in 2000 was not predicted by 1999 DVOA ratings were the two teams that made the Super Bowl: Baltimore and the New York Giants. And there was one team that would have been expected to improve based on DVOA but went completely in the other direction. That team was the Dallas Cowboys.

Notice any similarity between the top teams in 1999 and the top teams in 2004? Like last year, the AFC dominated in 1999 with seven of the top nine teams in DVOA, while the NFC sent two 8-8 teams into the playoffs. What's strange is that one of those two NFC teams in the top nine was also one of those two NFC teams to make the playoffs at 8-8: Dallas. The conventional wisdom about the 1998 Cowboys held that Chan Gailey was losing control of the team and the triplets had gotten too old to win (Michael Irvin was lost for the season with an injury in Week 5, as described by Mike Tanier in Too Deep Zone from last week.) But Dallas just had crummy luck. Six of those eight losses came by a touchdown or less, and other two were by just ten points, both on the road against the playoff-bound Colts and Vikings. Dallas's poor win-loss record is even stranger because, as you saw a few paragraphs ago, the Cowboys had one of the league's easiest schedules.

Usually a team that finishes with such a high DVOA but a mediocre record becomes a great sleeper Super Bowl pick the following year. But between 1999 and 2000, the Cowboys made a lot of changes. Irvin retired, Deion Sanders left, Gailey was replaced by the immortal Dave Campo, and Aikman and Emmitt kept aging.

At the bottom of the ratings, San Diego had the lowest DVOA among teams with 8-8 records, and were lower than five different teams with losing records. The next year they collapsed to 1-15. The second-lowest 8-8 team was New England in the final year of the Pete Carroll era; they dropped to 5-11 the next year. The 1999 Arizona Cardinals were not quite as fluky as the 1998 Arizona Cardinals, but they still somehow won six games with the worst non-expansion DVOA in the league. They went 3-13 the next year.

One team that really stands out when you look at that table is Indianapolis, playing the same role as the 2003 Panthers and 2004 Falcons. They were the team that just kept winning, poor DVOA rating be damned. It doesn't make sense for a team to go 13-3 despite ranking 21st in DVOA.  The Colts did outperform their Pythagorean projection of 10.2 wins, but that really wasn't a big deal, because they were still the fifth-best team in the league according to Pythagorean wins. The Colts were similarly underrated by DVOA in 2002, ranking 20th despite a 10-6 record, so I wonder whether the issue here is something in the Colts' style of play that DVOA is not picking up correctly. One thing those two teams had in common was a terrible turnover differential, so perhaps the turnover penalty in DVOA needs to be reduced. Or some of it could be luck: the 1999 Indianapolis defense recovered 12 of 17 fumbles, for example.

A lot of the disconnect between the Colts' record and the Colts' DVOA rating comes from the running game. Indianapolis ranked third in passing offense but 16th in rushing offense -- even though Edgerrin James, in his rookie season, led the league with 1552 rushing yards. Yet James was nowhere near the league leaders in the Football Outsiders metrics -- he was 12th in total value (14.7 DPAR) and his play-by-play performance was actually below average (-4.6% DVOA). (DPAR explained here.)

Edge's main weakness in 1999 was actually the same as his main weakness in 2003 and 2004: he was horrible near the goal line. Edge's DVOA in goal-to-go situations was -51.1%; his DVOA in all other situations was 2.6%. He was below average from the one- or two-yard line, and horrific when given the ball farther out. The average running back scored on 26% of goal-to-go carries from the three-yard line or beyond. Edge had 14 such carries and scored on none of them. In proper Edge fashion, he also fumbled three times in goal-to-go situations.

Edge's other weakness, however, showed what a different player he was before he tore his ACL. Last year, Edge had a 57% success rate. In his rookie year, Edge had a 43% success rate, and was much more of a boom-and-bust runner. (Success rate explaned here.) He was particularly poor on first downs. Edge had 84 carries on first down that went for a yard or less. No other running back in 1999 had more than 62 such carries. That meant Edge was constantly leaving Peyton Manning in second-and-long situations, and the Colts were fortunate enough to have a top quarterback who could advance the ball anyway.

The other playoff team with a record far better than its DVOA would otherwise indicate was Tampa Bay. But much of Tampa's low rating -- and much of the reason why Oakland is ranked fourth despite finishing 8-8 -- is one game in Week 15 that ended Oakland 45, Tampa Bay 0.

Here's a look at the best and worst individual players of 1999. Remember, DVOA measures value per play, while DPAR measures total value:

  • The top quarterback was, of course, Kurt Warner, but the gap between Warner (102.1 DPAR) and a big second-year leap forward by Peyton Manning (97.0 DPAR) was very small.  If you don't adjust for strength of schedule, the gap goes from 5 points to 32 points.
  • Guess which of the quarterbacks from the Class of 1999 had the best rookie season? Daunte Culpepper didn't throw a pass all season, so he's out. Would you believe the answer is Cade McNown?

Player Team DPAR Rank
Cade McNown CHI -2.8 34
Akili Smith CIN -26.7 47
Tim Couch CLE -41.5 48
Donovan McNabb PHI -41.6 49

  • At the start of the 1999 season, Jake Plummer was being celebrated as one of the NFL's best young quarterbacks, the man who would make the Cardinals respectable again. By the end of the 1999 season, Plummer ranked as the league's worst quarterback with -47.4 DPAR.
  • Stephen Davis was just a monster in 1999 with 1407 yards (second in the league) and 17 touchdowns (nobody else scored more than 13). He led the league with a 60% success rate, and nobody else with at least 75 carries was over 55%. He led the league with 49.1 rushing DPAR and also had the highest DVOA of all backs with at least 50 carries.
  • The other running back who had a huge year, of course, was Marshall Faulk. Since Faulk is now an aged backup who specializes in catching four-yard passes on 3rd-and-6, let's take a moment to celebrate just how awesome he was at his peak. Faulk was second in the league with 37.8 DPAR rushing. How far ahead of the league were Faulk and Davis? The difference between Faulk and the number three running back, Robert Smith (24.2 DPAR) is bigger than the difference between Smith and the 17th-ranked running back, Eddie George (10.7 DPAR). But wait, we haven't even touched Faulk's astonishing year in the passing game. Faulk had 36.9 DPAR receiving, more than twice as high as the second-ranked receiver among running backs, Tiki Barber (16.5 DPAR). Faulk had 1048 receiving yards and caught 84% of the passes thrown to him. No other running back with more than 25 passes had a catch percentage higher than 78%.
  • Although Davis and Faulk dominated the league in rushing DPAR, one other running back finished ahead of Faulk in rushing DVOA, but he only carried the ball 89 times: some no-name scrub from Baltimore named Priest Holmes.
  • The least valuable running back of 1999 was ... wait for it ... wait for it ... Ricky Williams (-18.2 DPAR). The second-worst running back in rushing DPAR was Warrick Dunn, but he was also the third-best running back in receiving DPAR.
  • The top wide receivers in DPAR were Jimmy Smith, Cris Carter, Tim Brown, Isaac Bruce, and Randy Moss. Slightly lower, in the "whatever happened to" file, are Patrick Jeffers of Carolina (eighth) and Michael Westbrook of Washington (ninth). The league's least valuable receiver was J.J. Stokes of San Francisco.
  • Does a strong performance in a limited role mean that a player will be successful as a starter? That's one of the oft-debated questions here at Football Outsiders. Can a player with a high DVOA as a backup running back succeed in a starting role? (We'll ask LaMont Jordan in a year, I guess.) Does a high DVOA for a third receiver mean that player can become a number one receiver? 1999 tosses a few more players into this discussion. We rank receivers with a minimum of 50 passes, and the top three receivers in DVOA were all guys with between 50 and 60 passes. Each of those guys eventually became a starting receiver for another team, with differing levels of success. Number one was Atlanta's Tim Dwight. Number two was St. Louis's Az Hakim. Number three was a 27-year-old career scrub from the Chiefs named Joe Horn.
  • Two tight ends were a step ahead of the pack: one player having his first good year (Tony Gonzalez) and one player having his last good year (Rickey Dudley). Although Gonzalez had a slight advantage in DPAR, Dudley had a significantly higher DVOA -- but he only was thrown 59 passes, compared to 108 for Gonzalez. The least valuable tight end was Jed Weaver of Philadelphia, probably because he was the safety valve for a struggling rookie. Weaver caught only 39% of intended passes; the league average for tight ends was 60%.
  • One final note. There was a punt in 1999 that was just ridiculous, far past any baseline I had ever created. In Week 5, on the road against the Jets, Bryan Barker punted the ball from the Jaguars' own 5-yard line to the Jets' 12-yard line, an 83-yard punt. What the hell? That's unreal.

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 24 Sep 2005

23 comments, Last at 26 Sep 2005, 9:56pm by Ryan Carney

by Adam (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 3:14pm

There was an 82 yard punt in the Pitt-Nebraska game last Saturday.

by charles (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 3:24pm

Hey Aaron, do you have the DVOA of the 62-7 jags-dolphins playoff game from that year? Just curious to see.

by DavidH (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 3:27pm

I like the intro...

Oh, and I guess the stats are interesting, too :)

by Björn (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 4:08pm

If a punt bounces away from the returner, who knows where it will go?

On that note, CFL punter Jon Ryan, who is on his way to breaking the CFL's all time punting record for punting average in a season will probably be playing in the NFL next year. Ladies and gentlemen, keep your eyes peeled. This year, he has been booming for over 51 yards per kick. (See link)

by Nathan (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 4:17pm

an 83 yard punt?!

by Björn (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 4:20pm

I don't get what is so amazing about that. If the punter kicks is 42 yards in the air, and it rolls for another 41 yards because the returner fell down or something, that goes in the books as an 83 yard punt.

by Trogdor (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 4:39pm

Woohoo! Go Browns! Highlights from 99, in order:

1) Winning the Hall of Fame game. Maybe winning it wasn't so important (although it was against the Cowboys), what really mattered was that they were back! This is, and likely will remain, the only preseason game I have ever held a party for.

2) Beating almost-as-pathetic New Orleans on a hail mary (Couch to Johnson) for the first win. They were still in the game thanks largely to a fumble by worth-ten-picks Ricky Williams while driving for a clinching score (or running out the clock). Thanks, Ricky.

3) Winning at Pittsburgh, on a last-second field goal. The attempt was set up by a boneheaded penalty against some backup Steelers linebacker from OSU, who will never amount to anything, and certainly won't catch TD passes in consecutive Super Bowls.

That's it! What a dreadful year. Every advantage given to them in the draft, decent expansion players available, a clean salary cap slate, and that's what they ended up with? Matt Millen could hardly have done worse.

On a more fun note, this was one of the years with an odd number of teams, meaning that someone had to have a bye every week. This is reason #1 that the league should stick with 32 teams and a wonderfully balanced, regular schedule. How dumb was it for teams to have byes in weeks 1 or 17? I think this year's byes began a week or two early, but week 1?

by Andrew (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 5:00pm

83 yard punt?

Randall Cunningham once kicked a sneak 91 yard punt against the Giants I believe.

He always claimed he could have lead the league in punting if Buddy Ryan would have let him.

I find it interesting that Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Tampa Bay all had the best defenses in the league in 1999. That truly foreshadowed things to come given their 26th, 27th, and 30th ranking in offense.

by fyo (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 5:29pm

Would it be possible to restrict the contribution of any single game to the overall DVOA score? This would help with situations like the 45-0 shellacking of Tampa Bay as well as the games without relevance at the end of the season (without resorting to an arbitrary reduction).

One could actually take it one step further: reduce the possible contribution of any single PART of a game, in an effort to weed out garbage time scoring.

I'm not sure how you weigh the contributions of individual plays, but it might actually also make sense to use a cap there as well - similar to what you already do for line yards.

by VarlosZ (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 5:43pm

Say, it's great that we have DVOA numbers for all of 1999, but where are the numbers for Week 2 of 2005? I want to get my money's worth, here. . .

by Sean (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 7:24pm

I'm not surprised by the wild difference in James' success rate at all. I had him on my fantasy team (I had the most loaded fantasy team in the universe in 1999- Warner, Bruce, Faulk, James, Jimmy Smith, Randy Moss...what?) and so I paid close attention to Colts games. All I remember is that he would run into the line for no gain over and over, until finally he ran into the line and kind of bounced off someone into the clear and then proceed to run for 60 yards. It was about the most unimpressive great season imaginable.

by Zac (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 8:21pm

What money?

by Jets Pete (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 8:55pm

Great stuff. I am really surprised at the high performance of the Jets. They finished 8th despite having some very bad losses early in the year with Rick Mirer at quarterback. In a few of those games, the offense was just abysmal. Ironically, the game that cost the Jets the most may have been at #4 Oakland (a game in which the Jets blew a sizeable 2nd half league).

However as a Jet fan, this chart just adds to my pain. Not only would Vinny have made a difference, but if they made the play-offs the Jets might have been able to get to at least Round 2. Painful memories indeed.

by Aaron (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 10:28pm

2005 stats will be available starting Tuesday, and on Monday you'll find out why I couldn't do them for two weeks. I have the 2005 DVOA ratings now through Week 2 (Pittsburgh is on top, duh) but rather than write a commentary that would just be rendered moot by this weekend's games, I decided to hold off until after the weekend. The 1999 stuff was done months ago, I just never finished writing the article until yesterday.

by Josh (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 10:31pm

I'd like to see the Jets breakdown with Mirer as QB and Lucas as QB, I imagine it's fairly large

by VarlosZ (not verified) :: Sat, 09/24/2005 - 10:36pm

#12: VarlosZ,
What money?

Damnit, I forgot to turn on the laugh track.

Thanks for all the hard work, Aaron -- I think these things are fascinating. Out of curiousity, how far back are play-by-play summaries available for all teams? In other words, how many of these articles could there eventually be?

by Ted (not verified) :: Sun, 09/25/2005 - 3:23am

I am a Raider fan and remember this season quite well. A few comments. First, Rickey Dudley??? This guy was always thought of as a colossal dissapointment but he was apparently pretty good for a while.
Second, do you have rankings for variance? I reckon the Raiders were the least consistent team in the NFL that year. You mention the Tampa Bay game, but they also beat the Bills, Vikings and Chiefs (once) but lost to the Chargers, the Broncos twice and the Packers.
Third, I am surprised the special teams weren't even worse. They lost about three or four games due to special teams mistakes (these losses caused them to draft Janikowski in the first round next year. Ugh.)
Finally a lot of people wanted Jon Gruden fired this year because the team was so inconsistent and underacheiving. In particular people were angry about losing to the Broncos twice but they seem to have been better than their 6-10 record. Many think he saved his job by beating Kansas 41-38 in week 17 (my favourite game ever), ending a string of about 193 consecutive losses to the Chiefs. I wonder how things would have turned out if he had been fired. Is there someting about Gruden that causes his teams to badly underachieve their DVOA?

by Kibbles (not verified) :: Sun, 09/25/2005 - 3:45am

Aaron, I'm pretty sure the record for the longest punt in NFL history is 99 yards, and I'm also pretty sure it happened against Denver. Can't remember who did it, though.

Take a second to think about that. You're pinned on your own 1 yard line. Your offense takes three shots to move the ball. No luck. You're punting from your own end zone. You boom a punt, the other team lets hit fall. It takes a favorable bounce, rolls, rolls, rolls... stops dead on the other 1 yard line. You just completely reversed the field. It's the one NFL record that I'm pretty sure will never be broken (unless we start adopting CFL rules).

by DavidH (not verified) :: Sun, 09/25/2005 - 5:58am

Wouldn't what you described be a 98 yard punt? (100 minus 1 yd at each end)

A 99 yard punt would have to be from your own one to the other team's endzone, for a touchback, right? Or am I missing something here?

by Whatever0 (not verified) :: Sun, 09/25/2005 - 11:14am

Yes, that would be a 98 yard punt, the current NFL record, by Steve O'neal against Denver. He kicked it from the back of the endzone, it first bounced at the opponents 30, then came to rest at the 1 yard line. That's a freak play.

by Tom (not verified) :: Mon, 09/26/2005 - 3:29am

As a Titans fans, I'm extremely surprised to see an offensive ranking of #6 and a defensive ranking of #18. I mean, I remember who the wideouts were that year, and Kevin Dyson, the post-Pittsburgh Yancey Thigpen, Isaac Byrd, and Chris Sanders were not exactly names that struck fear into the hearts of opposing defensive backs. Then again, when you have a team that can go 14-2 without beating anybody with a winning record, it's a weird year.

by Larry (not verified) :: Mon, 09/26/2005 - 2:30pm

Looking at the Eagles' weighted DVOA showing a good bit of improvement, I can't wait to see the numbers for the Doug Pederson experience. Oooh boy. Looking at the three guys who did start right away, I can't argue with Reid waiting to put McNabb in, but still...

by Ryan Carney (not verified) :: Mon, 09/26/2005 - 9:56pm

Aaron, how do you explain the colts anomoly?...or is it just that?


text:
 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Problems logging in? Click here to fix login problems.

Please enter your username and password to log in.
Log me on automatically each visit:
Login problems: I can't stay logged in | I forgot my password | I need a username

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


text:
Free Shipping On Orders Over $200 - Continental US Only
Skip Navigation LinksHome > Shop by Category > Closed Flats > Charles-Philip---Lana---Green-Herringbone-Flat

Charles Philip - Lana - Green Herringbone Flat

The 'Lana' is Charles Philip's modern take on the slipper silhouette in this season's hot herringbone trend.

  • Herringbone fabric upper
  • Suede tassel detail
  • Fabric piping detail
  • Leather footbed
  • Rubber sole
This product is not available.

No results found.

Review this Product
  • FREE Shipping On All Orders Over $200 Shipped to Continental USA.
  • Standard Ground Shipping is $6.95 for orders under $200.
  • All US shoe orders ship tax-free
  • Fast & Free Exchanges for 90 days on unworn items, including sale
  • Pre-Paid UPS Label enclosed for easy exchanges and returns
  • Exchange shipping is free!
  • $6.95 restocking adjustment will be deducted from return sent using the pre-paid UPS label
  • UPS 2nd Day and 3rd Day shipping are also available at checkout
  • International shipping available and quoted during checkout

We are not perfect but we try to be!  If you are not satisfied, please let us know how we can improve your footnotesonline experience!

Most orders ship within 24 hours of being placed, Monday-Friday.  Please refer to the Shipping map below to estimate your delivery date.

Visit US Shipping Page or the International Shipping Page

Footnotesonline Shipping Transit Times

Please enter your information and we will alert you when your request becomes available!

Add me to your preferred shopper list for fashion news updates and special promotions

Note: Due to their popularity, some sizes may not be available from the manufacturer. However we will do our best to accommodate you. Thanks!


text:
Robyn Meredith

Robyn Meredith

10/05/2009 @ 6:00PM

Attention Chinese Shoppers

Morgan Stanley economist Stephen S. Roach sounded a stark warning on the global economy Monday.

“For those of you counting on the American consumer to snap back, forget it–it’s not going to happen,” Roach said. “Consumers are as overextended as they’ve ever been,” and it will take them at least three to five years to retrench and dig out of debt, particularly with high U.S. unemployment rates of 9.8%, he said.

The implications for the global economy are bleak. He predicted that China will be forced to spend billions more on a stopgap stimulus plan next year. “By mid-2010, China will be hit by a reality check,” which is that Chinese exports will stall because U.S. consumer spending will not have regained its previous strength.

Roach predicted China would embark on a second stimulus plan to help the nation through the slow recovery in the global economy.

But more than that, Roach said in a speech Monday that the Great Recession is serving as a long-running crisis that will force Asia–particularly China–to change its pattern of serving as the world’s factory. It has already forced American shoppers to stop serving as the world’s shoppers.

Roach, who is the Hong Kong-based chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, lays out a vision of the future in his new book, The Next Asia: Opportunities and Challenges for a New Globalization.

In the Asia of the future, Asia’s 3.5 billion consumers need to be encouraged to spend more and save less, Roach said.

“Today’s Asia remains very much dominated by an increasingly China-centric export machine,” Roach said. China successfully and dramatically grew its economy with strong government support for export-led growth since it began its move toward capitalism in 1978. But more than 30 years later, Roach said the time has come for a shift in strategy. “Asia must change the model.”

China is now the world’s third-largest economy, nipping at the heels of second-largest Japan, and China has gone from a nation of peasants to a nation with a large and fast-growing middle class of hundreds of millions of Chinese.

Why aren’t they spending more? The lack of a strong safety net has led many Asians to increase their savings as they get richer, rather than spending a larger portion of their newfound income.

To get China’s consumers spending more of their incomes “requires a massive investment in the long-neglected social safety net in China,” Roach said.

In China, more than 65 million workers lost their “iron rice bowl” of health care, pensions and other benefits when they lost jobs at defunct state-owned enterprises shut down over the past 15 years as China embraced capitalism.

Shell-shocked Chinese who still had jobs began saving more and more in case they or family members urgently needed health care, or faced early retirement.

Eswar Prasad, a professor at Cornell University and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, has calculated the dramatic rise in China’s household savings rate: In 2000, it stood at 27.5%, but by 2008, it had increased to 37.5%. While consumption has been falling as a percentage of GDP, China’s exports have been rising.

Because U.S. consumer spending accounts for such a large proportion of the global economy, without a rebound, the outlook is bleak–for a comeback in China’s exports and for a comeback in the global economy.

“We are in a weak recovery,” Roach said. “There could be a relapse, a double dip.”

Comments are turned off for this post.


text:
| |

Best known as the Opportunity Expert based on my proprietary leadership methodology called, "the immigrant’s perspective” that defines the characteristics to be a 21st century leader. This methodology promotes the idea of leading through a lens of opportunity – that is enabled through a mindset of continuous survival, renewal and reinvention. That if leaders embrace the immigrant’s perspective, they will have a distinct advantage in business by being able to see and seize previously unseen opportunities, and opportunities others don’t see at all. I am a former C-suite corporate executive and entrepreneur of several successful companies – my firm (Glenn Llopis Group) is a thought-leadership, human capital and business strategy consultancy. We enable corporations to develop their leadership identity to further define and implement go-to-market strategies. Most of my writings, speaking engagements and consulting assignments focus on leadership, change management, Hispanics in America, career advancement, marketing diversity management, entrepreneurship, business development and turn-around operations. I am the author of Earning Serendipity: 4 Skills for Creating and Sustaining Good Fortune in Your Work; Why a Personal Employee Brand will Save Your Career and Your Workplace, Preparing U.S. Leadership for the Cultural Demographic Shift, Awakening the Latino Factor and Women Must Dive In, Not Just Lean In. I make frequent appearances on local and national TV, including CNN, Fox, ABC, NBC, and Univision. Circle me on Google+

Contact Glenn Llopis

The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Leadership 30,159 views

8 Traps Successful Leaders Must Avoid

When an organization is performing well, investments in talent and innovation should be at full-throttle.   As recent history has shown, companies tend to get complacent when they are on top, instead of sustaining their momentum through strategic focus.   Great leaders know how to keep momentum alive by leveraging their distinct competitive advantages.   They remain hungry in their passionate pursuit of endless possibilities and continually push the envelope to assure the promise of the organization’s culture remains vibrant.  Unfortunately, many leaders stop taking initiative and the required risks to sustain their competitive edge. They fall into the trap of playing it too safe and become self-satisfied, while others get too greedy and lose their attention to detail.

It is more difficult to stay on top than it is to get there.  This is why successful leaders know the importance of “managing disruption” to stay in the lead.  Managing disruption is about finding new methods for how the organization can win, grow and elevate its relevancy.  It’s about  changing what got you to the top, and this means discovering untapped interconnection points amongst the organization’s talent pool, their capabilities, technologies, brands, vendors, the supply chain, etc. – to sustain cutting-edge success.  It means that as a leader, you must live with the entrepreneurial spirit.

Successful leaders know that the global marketplace is changing rapidly.  They recognize that the cause of one’s initial success may be difficult to repeat and sustain because the competition is so incredibly fierce.  As such, great leaders know they must continually look for new ways to strengthen their company’s value proposition and further develop their marketplace distinction.  More than ever before, leaders must manage disruption in ways that inspire hope, not fear – by helping the organization become more productive and forward-thinking, incentivizing performance, encouraging growth in its people, and improving operating standards.   This is why companies such as Apple, Nike, Amazon, Google, Target, Samsung and others like them are regarded as the most innovative and progressive-thinking organizations in the world.

Failure to effectively manage disruption leaves your organization vulnerable rather than fully prepared for and in better control of its future.   This is why CEOs are coming and going so frequently.   Perhaps this also explains why the cost of firing a CEO has grown so significantly.   Daniel Gross recently wrote a compelling story in The Daily Beast titled, Fast Times In The Corner Office, where he discusses why the impatience of investors and volatility of Wall Street is speeding up the inevitable doom of CEOs.    From CEO  to store manager, your ultimate responsibility is to continually and proactively put your organization  in a position of attainable and sustainable growth by creating a culture that never becomes complacent and is always being tasked to elevate its game.

To assure that you are able to effectively manage disruption and strengthen the value proposition of your organization along the way, here are eight traps you must avoid – especially when times are good and the profit and loss statement looks strong:

1.  Overlooking or Ignoring Potential Problems

As a leader you are either in the midst of solving a problem, coming out of a problem or heading into a set of new problems.   Effective leaders know how to alleviate tension points throughout the various life cycles of business.   I’ve seen too many leaders ignore what is a new problem or threat on the horizon only to see their market share slip – thus creating a bigger more costly problem.

Great leaders know how to anticipate crisis and manage problems before circumstances force their hand.  The ones that do find more success as a result of the problems they’ve solved.   The key is not to wait for the potential problem to multiply.  Take the initiative and confront every problem head-on.    Discover the opportunities embedded within problems and you will be more comfortable dealing with them, regardless of the magnitude.  Leaders who ignore a potential problem do so because they approach it through a lens of negativity, expecting the worst and not wanting to be held accountable if they can’t solve it.

When you begin to associate problems as opportunity, you will make a powerful observation:  problems are all the same, just packaged differently

2.  Managing Tactics Versus Leading Growth and Improvements

Leaders have a tendency to get too tactical when they become risk adverse.  They begin to follow more than lead.  They forget what their teams need and expect from them and lose sight of the bigger picture.

Leaders should always be focused on growth and improvements – of people, sales, revenue, maturity of the corporate culture, customers and vendor relationships, etc.  As a leader, you must instinctually be focused on creating a high-performance work environment.

Don’t get caught off guard by your competitors because you got lost in the details and your vision became blurry in the process.

3.  Allowing Employees to Become Complacent

Complacency is a common trap leaders fall into and it’s most noticeable in the performance of their employees.   You know when leaders have lost their edge when employees are losing theirs, too.   Employees who carefully observe their leaders, paying close attention to their behaviors and natural tendencies,   notice when their intensity, focus and expectations begin to wane – and they view this as permission to withdraw themselves.

As a leader, it is your responsibility to set the tone for your department, team and organization.   When you slip, it creates a domino effect.   This is why leaders are caught off guard when their top-performing employees leave the organization.

Post Your Comment

Please or sign up to comment.

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.


text:
| |

I've been in the IT industry since the time of the dinosaurs (ICL anyone?). I've written books about the Internet and networking, consulted for all sorts of companies, and been a contributor and columnist for Network World for 18 years (check out my Backspin and Gearhead columns). I created and co-founded Netratings (now wholly owned by Nielsen) and have CTO'ed for a couple of startups. I live in Ventura, CA. I do not surf.

Contact Mark Gibbs

The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

CIO Next 12,088 views

Goodbye, Instagram, It Was Fun While It Lasted [UPDATED][UPDATED]

NEW YORK, NY - APRIL 09:  In this photo illust...

Well, Instagram, it was fun. Back when you first started up you offered Twitter a unique way to  integrate images with tweets and we all loved you.

It was easy, it was cool, and it added to our social media experience. So we started on a relationship that worked well for us and in the process we made you highly desirable.

But then you got acquired by Facebook (for $1 billion!) and it all fell apart.

Over the last few weeks you started to ruin our relationship by not allowing Twitter to display images directly in tweets. What was once a smooth, near seamless integration of images and text was turned into a two-step process where we had to click on a link in the tweet to see the image.

You took the polish off the pics.

While that was, to say the least, disappointing, yesterday you made an announcement that has moved us from tolerating you making our online lives just that little bit more difficult to making us think you’ve not just lost your grasp of our relationship, you’ve also decided to take advantage of us.

Yesterday you announced a new terms of service and that as of this coming January 16,

… you hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use the Content that you post on or through the Service …

This is all brand new language in the ToS and I suspect that this is more of the same bad thinking that seems to be guiding Facebook‘s revenue strategy.

What you’re saying is you want us to carry on posting our photos to Instagram and you can resell them to anyone you please. Not only do we have no say in who uses the photos and how, we get no compensation!

Does that sound reasonable? Well, I guess to you it does but to us, your user base, it sounds predatory, opportunistic, over-reaching, and bordering on the unethical.

So, Instagram, this is it. We’re done. I could have put up with you messing around with Twitter but taking advantage of me? Not going to happen. That sudden tiny loss you might have just felt? That was me deleting my account.

Goodbye, Instagram, it was fun while it lasted.

UPDATE 1: Kevin Systrom, co-founder of Instagram, blogged a few hours ago about the tsunami of criticism over the company’s new Terms of Service. He began with the caveat:

Legal documents are easy to misinterpret. So I’d like to address specific concerns we’ve heard from everyone …

Which can be taken to either mean “we crafted a poor ToS” or “you just don’t understand us.” Systrom continued:

From the start, Instagram was created to become a business. Advertising is one of many ways that Instagram can become a self-sustaining business, but not the only one. Our intention in updating the terms was to communicate that we’d like to experiment with innovative advertising that feels appropriate on Instagram. Instead it was interpreted by many that we were going to sell your photos to others without any compensation. This is not true and it is our mistake that this language is confusing. To be clear: it is not our intention to sell your photos. We are working on updated language in the terms to make sure this is clear.

Really? So you actually expect us to believe that you didn’t mean what you wrote in the new ToS which was:

… you hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use the Content that you post on or through the Service …

Given that Instagram is part of Facebook and both companies can easily afford the biggest, meanest lawyers around what are you telling us? That you hired incompetent lawyers or that you goofed by trying to leave the terms so loose that you could test the waters and got caught out? Either way it looks like either naiveté or incompetence. So, Kevin, which is it?

UPDATE 2: It appears that many organizations that use Instagram aren’t happy with the new ToS … for example, National Geographic’s Instagram account which has more than 650,000 followers has suspended it’s use of the service.

Post Your Comment

Please or sign up to comment.

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

  • Adam Hardin Adam Hardin 2 years ago

    It looks like there may have been a misunderstanding with the language in the new Privacy Policy or Terms of Service. It has been since clarified. Too bad you already deleted your account…

  • Of course they have updated their TOS. It was a highly anticipated move, right after scads of members made their way towards the virtual exit.
    This is of course a typical and hastily constructed excuse Instagram have bunged together in order to calm the masses.

    Iv’e also deleted my account due to the simple fact that ‘i read it as i saw it’ and i have no intention of hanging around until they find a successful way to sell me off under a confusing mish mash of legal nonsense.

    To be honest, it’s not a great loss in any case, but at least i get to sleep soundly. :)

  • Matt Matt 2 years ago

    You should be thankful the Feds have one less avenue to spy on you with. Im really going to shed a tear.

  • I could´t agree more to your report. What calls my attention about their Mr. Systrom answer is that he focuses on the topic of “claiming propperty” but never mentions anything about the Worldwide license you are granting to them. he is still evading the real subject in question. … as many users I already migrate to flickr just in case.

  • ManOfBusiness ManOfBusiness 2 years ago

    The message was clean and cut for once, Instagram retains the rights to all property uploaded through its servers. I don’t doubt that the intent was to use its users pictures as media advertising, as facebook has done this in the past, I however beileve there was much more behind the clasue especially when “Royalty-Free” and “Transferable sub-license” are used in succession.

    Transferable: They can assign someone else the same rights to your photo.
    Sub-licensable: They can relicense your work to someone else, presumably for a fee.
    Royalty Free They owe you no money for usage.
    Worldwide: License is not limited by country.

    I for one never created an instagram, and found twitters picture hosting capabilities to work just fine as Im fully capable of editing my photos using third party apps from the market.


text:
| |

Narrative Science is the leader in automated narrative generation for the enterprise. Powered by artificial intelligence, its Quill™ platform analyzes data from disparate sources, understands what is important to the end user and then automatically generates perfectly written narratives to convey meaning from the data for any intended consumer or business audience, at unlimited scale.

Investing 1,085 views

Forbes Earnings Preview: Motorola Solutions

Wall Street is high on Motorola Solutions (MSI), expecting it to report earnings that are up 17.9% from a year ago when it reports its fourth quarter earnings on Wednesday, January 23, 2013. The consensus estimate is 92 cents per share, up from earnings of 78 cents per share a year ago.

Despite not changing over the past month, the consensus estimate is down from three months ago when it was 93 cents. Analysts are expecting earnings of $2.76 per share for the fiscal year. Revenue is expected to be $2.45 billion for the quarter, 9.7% higher than the year-earlier total of $2.23 billion. For the year, revenue is projected to come in at $8.71 billion.

The increase in profit in the third quarter broke a streak of three consecutive quarters of year-over-year profit decreases. In the most recent quarter, profit increased by 60.9% year-over-year. Looking back further, profit dropped 47.9% in the second quarter, 68.4% in the first quarter and 37.2% in the fourth quarter of the last fiscal year.

The company has seen revenue grow for three quarters straight. The 2.3% revenue increase brought the figure up to $2.15 billion in the most recent quarter. Looking back further, revenue increased 4.5% in the second quarter from the year earlier and 3.8% in the first quarter.

Analysts have grown increasingly optimistic about the stock in the last three months. Consequently, over the past quarter the stock price has increased from $50.23 on October 19, 2012 to $57.95.

Motorola Solutions is a data communications and telecommunications equipment provider One of Motorola’s main competitors in the communications equipment industry, Polycom Inc (PLCM), will report earnings on January 23, 2013. Other competitors in the technology sector include: Nokia (NOK), Siemens (SI), and Motorola Mobility (MMI).

Earnings estimates provided by Zacks.

Narrative Science, through its proprietary artificial intelligence platform, transforms data into stories and insights.

Post Your Comment

Please or sign up to comment.

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.


text:
| |

I am a Managing Partner at Brookside Strategies, LLC, an energy and utility management consulting firm based in Darien, Connecticut. I've spilled blood, sweat and tears grappling with the full spectrum of barriers and misconceptions about distributed generation and energy-efficiency technologies. Previously, I practiced law in New York City at Paul Weiss Rifkind Garrison & Wharton, LLP and Jenner & Block, LLP. I also attended journalism school at Columbia University and earned a JD at Stanford Law School. I've written about energy and environmental issues for Forbes, The Nation, Mother Jones and several other publications. I am the Chair of the Northeast Clean Heat and Power Initiative. Drop me a line - or two - at wmp@cleanbeta.com.

Contact William Pentland

The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Energy 3,167 views

Japan Scales Solar PV

Japan PV - IHS ResearchSolar power is set for explosive growth in Japan over the next year as robust government policies and programs support strong demand.

IHS Research predicts that Japan will install more than 5 gigawatts (GW) of new solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity in 2013, marking an increase of 120% compared to the previous year.

Japan‘s feed-in tariff (FIT) provides one of the world’s most generous solar PV incentives, providing upwards of $7 per kilowatt hour for some solar PV projects.

“At ¥42 Japan‘s FIT is by far the most attractive globally—overly generous perhaps, which could lead to overheating of the market,” said Ash Sharma, senior director of solar research at IHS, in a press release. “And while a 10% reduction in tariffs is widely expected by industry players, this will have little effect on both internal rates of return and market demand.”

In the first quarter alone, solar PV installations have surged above 1 GW, which is roughly equivalent to the total capacity of a nuclear power plant. If this pace continues for the rest of the year, Japan will become the world’s second largest solar PV market, jumping ahead of Germany, Italy and the United States.

Post Your Comment

Please or sign up to comment.

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.