Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Current Statistics for GD

11 Feb 2009: Govt infuses Rs 3,800 crore in 3 banks to raise capital adequacy.
Under the recapitalisation package, Central Bank of India will get Rs 1,400 crore, while UCO Bank and Vijaya Bank will get Rs 1,200 crore each, home minister P Chidambaram told reporters



BUSINESS WITH DIFFERENT COUNTRIES:::
South Africa - $6.2 billion trade

Static Statistics for GD

INDIA:::
Population aged 65+: 6,16,52,80,000 (6.16 Cr)
GDP growth (% growth) - 7.3
Annual rates of inflation (%) - 8.38
Tourism receipts (US$ million) - 11,151

  • India spends 1.2% of its GDP on health
  • India emerges 2nd in medical tourism race. In 2007, Indian hospitals treated 4.5 lakh patients from other countries against topper Thailand's 12 lakh. - Deloitte

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Foreign Recipients of Nishan-e-Pakistan

Where Real Innovation Happens

Came across an article published by Forbes. It really penetrates deep into the real thing of entrepreneurship. "Don't look for the gilded road to fortune. Look for passion."A perfect example of creating ur own path than to follow one.

Forget Silicon Valley. Traditional wisdom is that it represents the model for American innovation: a hotbed of young entrepreneurs with easy access to capital from a large pool of savvy investors.

Think again: The World Wide Web was started by Englishman Tim Berners-Lee because he was frustrated with how hard it was to share information at CERN, the huge physics lab in Switzerland where he worked. Linux was developed by a Finnish college student who wrote the operating system "just for fun" and is only one example of thousands of open-source software projects begun around the world by people who were writing software to "scratch their own itch" and giving it away for free. Even the personal computer revolution, which took root in Silicon Valley, began with a bunch of hobbyists at the Homebrew Computer Club.

It turns out that many of the great waves of creative destruction that have reinvented Silicon Valley didn't start there. More important, they didn't even start with the profit motive.

Rather, they started with interesting problems and people who wanted to solve them, exercising technology to its fullest because exploring new ideas was fun.

I call these people "alpha geeks." They are smart enough to make technology do what they want rather than what its originator expected. The alpha geeks exercise an idea or a gadget, pushing it past its current limits, reinventing it and eventually paving the way for entrepreneurs who figure out how to create mainstream versions of their novel ideas.

I've watched this process now for better than 30 years as a computer book publisher, conference producer, technology activist and early-stage investor. I learned early on that many of the innovations behind my best-selling books weren't coming from companies but from individuals. Their ideas spread through a grassroots network of early adopters and tinkerers long before entrepreneurs and investors appeared on the scene to figure out how to make money from the idea.

The Internet developed in this early adopter Petri dish for more than 15 years before entrepreneurs and venture capitalists clicked on their first e-mail. I was publishing books on free and open-source software in the mid-1980s; Silicon Valley didn't get the open-source message till 1998.

Even recent venture booms, like the one around Web 2.0, a concept that my company popularized in 2004 to remind people that the Web had continued to evolve after the dot-com bust of 2001, missed the story till it was well underway. Key ideas and projects were born during the years when investors had given up on the Web. Only developers driven by a strong personal vision kept at it.

So where's the alpha-geek innovation happening today?

I see it bubbling up in areas like manufacturing, open-source hardware, sensor networks and robotics.

Yes, there are start-ups in these areas, but, more important, there's an enthusiast boom. The Maker Faire, an event O'Reilly Media launched in 2006 to celebrate the people playing at the interface of digital technology and the physical world, last year drew 65,000 attendees, including many families, to view the work of the 500 exhibiting "makers."

Or consider synthetic biology, where high school students are exploring the frontiers through events like the International Genetically Engineered Machines competition. When high-schoolers are doing genetic engineering, you know the future holds some big surprises!

We see innovators working from the outside to put flesh on the vision of government transparency articulated by the Obama administration. Software "hacks," like chicagocrime.org, one of the first Google Maps mash-ups, are becoming a prototype for how government data can be turned into new consumer services by start-ups like everyblock.com.

Tools for investigative journalism put together by nonprofits like the Sunlight Foundation presage the work of start-ups like Apture and Evri. And of course it's hard to ignore the fact that tools for grassroots activism, born out of political enthusiasm by a few "hackers" working for Howard Dean in 2004, turned into real products that helped win the national election only four years later.

How about the energy crisis? Yes, some of Silicon Valley's biggest investors are going after this opportunity. But even here, serendipity and personal curiosity play an unexpected role.

Consider Greenbox, a start-up founded by Jonathan Gay, one of the creators of the ubiquitous Flash technology for online video and animation. After retiring following the acquisition of Macromedia by Adobe (nasdaq: ADBE - news - people ), he built an "off the grid" house (mainly because it was too expensive to bring power to his remote location). He designed some tools to visualize and manage his home power consumption--then realized that they could become the basis of a new business.

So don't follow the money. Follow the excitement. The people inventing the future are doing so just because it's fun.

Tim O'Reilly is the founder and CEO of O'Reilly Media, thought by many to be the best computer book publisher in the world. O'Reilly Media also hosts conferences on technology topics. Tim's blog, the O'Reilly Radar, "watches the alpha geeks" and serves as a platform for advocacy about issues of importance to the technical community. He can also be found as @timoreilly on Twitter.


Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Sub-prime Mortgage Crisis

Right, starting with the term ‘sub-prime mortgage’. Mortgage refers to loans given to borrowers. Every bank has certain Prime customers. These are the customers to whom the bank ‘wants’ to give home loans to. The reason for this is the high credit ratings these customers have (Credit rating refers to how the banks perceive the ability of the borrower to return the loans with interest. A customer with high credit rating is someone who is deemed to be likely to return the money, based on his record of past borrowings, as well as public image and various other factors). Hence, it is preferable for the banks to loan these people the money. They also give them lower interest rates compared to other customers.

Now, recently, the banks had a lot of money in terms of liquid assets (non-fixed assets, usable cash) available to them. A combination of low interest rates (which reduced defaults) and large capital inflows from outside the U.S. (booming trade) created a surplus of ‘loanable’ liquid assets with the banks. So, now they wanted to loan this money as well. The problem was, that the prime customers were very few in number, and given the large number of banks, no bank was able to loan its entire cash to prime customers.

Hence, the investment banks had to shift to non-prime customers, technically called as sub-prime customers. These are people with less than desirable credit ratings. But still, the banks had to give out loans. For that, they started attracting these people with better interest rates (better implies lower rates), as well as relatively very easy payback options (Initially, I thought why the banks couldn’t sit tight with their money instead of taking high risks. But then, I realized that even if one investment bank comes out with such offers, the other banks are practically forced to do the same, otherwise they will be ripped off all their business to the other bank with supposedly better offers).

Also, in those years, the housing prices in the U.S. shot upwards. So, the people started to consider real estate as a viable investment option. They would buy the houses with loans and then expect the prices to shoot up. The plan was, when the price was sky-high, they would sell the property, pay off the debt and walk away with a handy sum of profit. The other option was refinancing in a few years time (Refinance implies, when the property for which I have taken a loan has increased in value, I would approach my lender to simplify my loan conditions, make the payment options easier for me, since my property has increased in value).

Herein lies the problem. As the number of customers getting home loans and investing into new, unoccupied homes shot upwards, it resulted into a surplus of available houses. By conventional rules of demand and supply, this led to a reduction in the demand, and hence a dip in the housing prices. The real estate prices stopped rising, and instead started declining.

Now consider a scenario, I bought a house for $120,000, initially paying all the installments diligently on time. After some time the prices started to fall. Now, 12 months down the line, I realize that my loan amount pending is $100,000 and the current value of my house is $75,000. So now I have an incentive to simply walk away from the home. Let the lenders possess the home and do whatever they want with it. At least I will save some of my investments. This is especially a possible situation given that the housing prices fell drastically and the loans were given to sub-prime customers who already have low credit rating. Hence, the number of defaults on loans increased, the banks did not even get their principal of the lent sums back, leave alone the interest. This caused a major problem with the banks with regard to available cash and liquidity.

It was this lack of available cash that caused the major chunk of problems with the U.S. financing system, causing problems with larger-than-life banks like Merrill-Lynch, AIG etc. (The bigger the bank, the more the amount loaned, the more the default, the more will be the amount lost, hence the biggest banks were strongly affected)

Pending Tasks

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/quickiearticleshow/3963147.cms

Sunday, January 18, 2009

First Website of the World!!!

First Website of the world - http://info.cern.ch