Troy Jensen

Google Alert: Twitter's Shot Across the Search Bow

I have to admit - I was never a big fan of the "Build It and They Will Come" monetization model in Silicon Valley. It all worked for us back in the early days - but now when out assisting startups and raising funds, I really work hard on clear business modeling and conservative pro forma financials. But Twitter is expanding in so many different ways, and has so many flexible paths to take while not alientating their devoted followers (IF they are careful) - I see the lights going up on the baseball field in that cornfield in Iowa. Will be watching closely on their next moves - I do agree, based on their critical mass, momentum, vast awareness and market conditions predicted over the next 12-18 months, a BIG IPO is in the air.

I have thought for the past year Apple or Google would gobble these guys up, simply because their war chests are giant and there is so much possibility tying this into their hardware/software products, and developing new streams of revenue. But I think I was smoking, that ship has sailed....thoughts?

Why Apple Tablet Delay Is Good News

I wanted to thank all the commentators this evening - some GREAT feedback on investing strategy, and some fantastic, well-reasoned subjects discussed. Very much appreciated!!!!

My Top Story for 2009: AT&T Blunders by Defending Its Wireless Coverage

Excellent viewpoint, kudos to the author on this article! Here's to AT&T and that higher standard in 2010. Great job!

Nokia vs. Apple: A Sign of Weakness?

I, as an Apple user and new investor, am not the least bit nervous, my friend. If you truly understand this vertical, Nokia has absolutely no time to sit and wait out a court battle, one that would take years and have multi-national jurisdictional issues galore. Innovation is not a buzzword - it is literally the oxygen smartphone manufacturers breathe in order not just to survive, but to thrive.

Nokia needs to concentrate on building a world-class R&D team and compete based on innovative, disruptive-technology products, instead of playing "prevent defense" as their financial teams bemoan the growing sense of doom of losing their international market-share.

Trust me, speed-to-market and innovation are CRITICAL in this vertical - Nokia is damaging their brand and pursuing a strategically erroneous path to try and battle Apple.


On Dec 29 06:33 PM Pexico wrote:

> Im so sad to say that it seems that those apple mobs are very nervous
> on these days. Of course Nokia has time to wait and get nice royalties
> from the patent stealers. Its so obvious, just take a break and stop
> that moaning.

Nokia vs. Apple: A Sign of Weakness?

As another long-time Silicon Valley tech guy, these slew of lawsuits just make me laugh. It's obviously desperation. But the real victim (of course Nokia will lose or settle for a pittance, that goes without saying) is the Nokia brand - the more this leaks from the business news into the mainstream consumer media, the worse Nokia looks. Reference the AT&T initial reaction to Verizon's infamous "Map Ads" - as a long-time marketing guy as well, I think the new AT&T ads are a laudable effort at strategically countering Verizon's VERY effective ad campaign, but the damage was done in the first fgew weeks, with the lawsuits and atrocious web page explanation of Verizon's "misguidance through malicious, libelous marketing." This can do nothing but long-term damage to Nokia, and is a terrible reactionary strategy at stemming their loss of market share. Nokia must be looking at global market share and the proverbial poop hit the fan - and some not-so-sharp tactics were blown into place before the long-term ramifications were thought out.

Google - much better job at cracking the Mobile OS wars. Nokia looks to be on a slow fade-out here...concentrate on R&D and producing revolutionary, blockbuster, game-changing products. This space changes in a New York minute - the courtroom is not the place Nokia has ANY chance of winning!

Why Apple Tablet Delay Is Good News

Again, I must say thank you for this comment - you really have detailed a plan of action, and my analysis, which from an equities standpoint seems to lag yours my friend, points me in your direction. And I love the wish list, let's hope (I have a feeling we are going to get a lot of our wish list with this product, just from what I have been hearing and reading) for us both we get the goodies we want and some very cool killer app surprises, which Apple has pulled off in the past (think back to all the rumors about what the iPhone was going to be, the mock-ups, and then how it came out - revolutionary to say the least, and far different from a lot of very credible insiders predictions...often for the better).

Here is a pretty cool post I found from Business Week that alludes to my point above, worth a read: www.businessweek.com/t...

Again, THANK YOU for taking your time for the feedback, I very much appreciate it.

Have a great rest of your holidays my friend!

PS And here is hoping with you this is NOT AT&T exclusive. ;)


On Dec 29 06:49 AM User 337017 wrote:

> I think your thoughts and analysis are right on. As mobile computing
>
> evolves it is only natural that there are needs for more usable products.
> If I were to have a wish list of the perfect device I would describe
> something about as large as pocketbook and as think as a
> Kindle. I could probably carry this in my coat pocket and a woman
> could certainly carry it in her handbag.
> It would be a combination of a small (touch laptop) that would also
>
> have the ability to be a Kindle . A similar Itunes type store would
> allow you to download like Kindle and itunes . They could partner
>
> with Borders or some other company
> In addition it would have most of the features of an iPhone which
> may include a camera and certainly the ability and access to the
>
> most of the apps. also it would have a built in webcam like the<br/>computers
> Think video calls.
> It obviously should have in addition to Internet access programs
> like Excel &amp; Word (their iWorks).
> And finally the ability to watch live video and listen to music<br/>As
> far as price. Obviously something around $500 would be nice but realistically
> they want to make money and I think somewheres
> between $800 and $1000 is the price. For those who want and can afford
> the price this is no problem. Besides the cellphone companies (hopefully
> not only AT&amp;T0 will possibly subsidize a portion of the price,
>
> If such a product or something similar were to come to market I think
> it would stand the industry on their heads. It would cover just about
> everything a person needs
> As far as the stock is concerned. I own a considerable amount of
> shares and it maybe that today's price (over $210 a share) may have
> been built in. If in fact one thought that the price would increase
> another 20%, 30%,50% etc it requires a considerable
> outlay to make a "killing" A cheaper bet may be to buy Options<br/>at
> future prices e.g. 3month.6month one year etc and at varing prices.
> As of today you can buy an
> Apr2010 Option at $250 for $4.15
> Jul2010 Option at $250 for $8.65
> Jan2011 Option at $250 for $55.20 (don't like this one)
> Hope these thouhts are helpful

Why Apple Tablet Delay Is Good News

EXCELLENT help. Thanks for the detailed response...very. very insightful. Appreciated, and I'm taking this in...


On Dec 29 06:30 AM Alex Bell wrote:

> While I applaud your enthusiasm about the potential of the Apple
> "tablet" it may be clouding your thoughts from an investment point
> of view. Whilst I run a fund management company which invests in
> Apple Inc., I can also say that, in this market, no one is an expert.
> I can at least offer you a view:
>
> Apple shares (AAPL) have tripled over the past year from a low of
> $78 to the close last night (28/12/2009) of $211.61 and that might
> put some people off investing. "Is it too late?" is a comment that
> many will be familiar with. To answer it you need some analysis of
> the facts and then add a dash of common sense. The facts are well
> reported, some in your article above, to which you can add:
>
> - Apple is now the worlds most profitable mobile phone manufacturer
> and yet it still has tiny market share and up until now very limited
> distribution;
>
> - Apple is the largest and most profitable retailer music worldwide
> a fact that is likely to further strengthen with record sales of
> iPods of Christmas 2009 and downloads on Christmas day which were
> 13x greater than it's nearest rival;
>
> - Apple TV is starting show signs of success. Could it have gained
> surprising TV and Movie market share when the 2009 figures are released?
>
>
> - Apple stores are arriving at a rate of 40 - 50 per year giving
> Apple not only one of the most profitable retail chains per square
> foot in the world but a highly efficient and controlled distribution
> showcase for it's products. An interesting fact is that everywhere
> an Apple store is opened website sales from that area also increase.
> Clever.
>
> - All Apple products have multiple income streams that change the
> profit dynamic radically in some cases. For example does Apple make
> more profit from selling iPods or Selling the music for the iPod.
> : iPods (Music, TV, Peripherals); iPhones (Apps, Music, TV, Data);
> and the list goes on.
>
> - Apple is basically a financially very healthy company with profits
> increasing in 2009 by an estimated 20% (despite the crisis).
>
> Note that in all of the above I have not mentioned the phenomenal
> success of the “Mac” in all its aesthetically pleasing forms. Apple
> has reported good growth in sales but I suspect that there will be
> a very pleasing surprise when the numbers are counted on 2009. It
> is easy to forget that Apple is a computer company first and foremost,
> but one with a difference as the conversion to the Mac is gaining
> pace. Some describe it as a “plague” others a “religion” or a “blessing”
> whomever is right the fact remains, it is infectious and that is
> good for investors in Apple. My favorite quote of the holiday season
> from a shopper in Switzerland while booking his place in the 2 month
> waiting list for a 27” iMac “I have no idea how to use it but its
> too beautiful not to buy”.
>
> A long answer to you question of should you double down. My reply
> would be “YES” but not because Apple may finally announce their tablet
> in January, that would be very nice side bet, more because it is
> sound investment in a good company that has a lot more success to
> come.

Why Apple Tablet Delay Is Good News

I have nothing concrete yet from any of my sources but here is some of the news from yesterday evening that started breaking:

news.cnet.com/8301-135...

www.product-reviews.ne.../

seekingalpha.com/insta...

www.tgdaily.com/hardwa...

All I can personally verify is that two separate Apple sources I have known for some time, but who are NOT working directly on the Tablet project, both confirmed delays from a late January launch to something looking like the end of Q1.

Hope this helps - and I hope we get better information over the next few days, although with Apple, we may get detailed information and location maps on North Korea's nuclear program!!! ;)


On Dec 29 05:32 AM LT wrote:

> What delay are you talking about? Post a link.

Thoughts on the Apple Tablet, iPhone Rumors

Thank you for the feedback, well said and I'm taking your opinion very seriously! Cheers my man...


On Dec 28 09:52 AM FloridaBoy2 wrote:

> ". I'm aggressive by nature - so although I'm more-than-willing to
> double-down on this being a landmark product launch comparable to
> the iPhone or iPod, I am doing my due-diligence. That just means
> to me, how big a bet - as an industry vet I play my gut in the mobile/Interactive
> space, and my gut is saying to push the chips forward. However, I
> would LOVE to hear everyone's (well, everyone that just isn't just
> hating on Apple - real advice, positive, negative or neutral) thoughts
> on Apple's current stock price - is this launch built in? If so,
> 50%? 100% If we look at the competitive set, and IF this all goes
> to launch late January, this will be a dominant technology news story.
> Short term Q1 play? Would love to hear thoughts - I'm a technology
> veteran in Interactive and mobile since 1995, but I have never professed
> to being a world-class equities trader. Love some feedback!
>
> " The "Model T" of televisions, the RCA Victor, received a ten-inch,
> black-and-white image and sold for $375 in 1946. By 1950 the Sears,
> Roebuck catalogue offered Silvertone receivers for less than $150."
>
>
> Fast forward to a 10" color screen. Apple may be the first but not
> not be the only player.
>
> I think AAPL will continue to rise into the earnings/product announcement.
> I am long but will not add any shares at these levels. My eyes are
> wide open and I use stops. It is a great company but it is still
> a stock, not a family member. :-)

Thoughts on the Apple Tablet, iPhone Rumors

I'd love to throw a wager down on the upcoming "flop!" ;) You are completely missing the point. Apple (as rumor has it - I have friends at Apple that won't even talk to me after a great bottle of scotch about iSlate, or whatever it will be!) absolutely revolutionized the smartphone space with the iPhone, and any argument to the contrary is just wasted air. Android and the slew of handsets coming out to compete with the iPhone are just that - the reactionary tactics of Google understanding computing is getting smaller, slimmer, much more mobile and data will be in the Cloud. Apple, based on the decade they have had and the amount of testing and innovation they are seemingly throwing into the Tablet product, is set to revolutionize mobile computing for the second time in less than three years.

Absolutely, this could be a flop - I mean, nothing is impossible. But based on what I am hearing from inside, reading from great reporters (props to my man here and this article - nice, neat, to the point, with a great wish list), and Apple's track record, which all reasonable investors can agree has been extraordinary over the past decade - I am doubling down that the Tablet product will be a new blockbuster.

It's not supposed to fit in your pocket or purse. I love my MacBook Air, but imagine the possibilities of a touchscreen with new gesture innovations, superior graphics, tactile feedback (I can't put my Google Documents or iWorks presentations together too well on my iPhone - it's actually my most-used device but it's too small for those duties, yet I would love if my MacBook Air had no keyboard, was slimmer, etc - perfect for someone very mobile like myself).

The key here is:

1. This of course won't be a product for everyone - no such thing - but my bet is it will have a much wider mass appeal than many of even the enthusiasts are expecting.

2. Apple was just named "Brand of the Decade," Steve Jobs was "CEO of the Decade" - these are not your Father's MacHead conspiracy publications, these are publications like Fortune Magazine, Time and AdWeek. So to simply dismiss this effort by Apple as an over-hyped marketing-based product release with no probable intrinsic value is silly at best, very ignorant or just plain biased at worst - and an very unintelligent analysis for your investing moves. Apple's decade of success, and their recent success in entering and revolutionizing the entire smartphone vertical, makes these comments just rubbish.

3. Everything points to this Tablet product being strongly tied to the iPhone brand lineup - you know, the one that stems from the "Invention of the Decade," the iPod. Again, IF executed correctly, to come out of the gates with this type of brand family reliance, Apple's incredible brand recognition, proven marketing prowess...yes, indeed it could be the blockbuster I think it will be. I would absolutely LOVE to be Apple's ad agency (Chiat) this month if indeed we get the expected product release - this is one you dream for in the ad world.

4. I'm aggressive by nature - so although I'm more-than-willing to double-down on this being a landmark product launch comparable to the iPhone or iPod, I am doing my due-diligence. That just means to me, how big a bet - as an industry vet I play my gut in the mobile/Interactive space, and my gut is saying to push the chips forward. However, I would LOVE to hear everyone's (well, everyone that just isn't just hating on Apple - real advice, positive, negative or neutral) thoughts on Apple's current stock price - is this launch built in? If so, 50%? 100% If we look at the competitive set, and IF this all goes to launch late January, this will be a dominant technology news story. Short term Q1 play? Would love to hear thoughts - I'm a technology veteran in Interactive and mobile since 1995, but I have never professed to being a world-class equities trader. Love some feedback!

Mac Enthusiasts Disclosure - Yes, I am an Apple fan, but I am playing with my new Droid phone tonight as I tap this (and I'm liking it!). I'm a technology fanatic to be frank - Apple simple has had, for me (and obviously quite a few other consumers), superior products that have won me over as a brand enthusiast (still hard to believe I actually refused to use my first Mac in 1996, at one of my early Internet jobs!). But Google of course has game in a very large way, I have worked with Google for years and years, and I use their online products on an hourly basis. So again, I'm not the typical MacHead! ;)

Cheers everyone, Happy Holidays...


On Dec 27 10:30 AM erniem wrote:

Is Google Really as Open as It Says?

Could not agree with the statement more - "Don't be fooled - Google is open only when it's convenient for them." I have dealt with Google on many levels since their inception, and despite their manifestos and their public party line of embracing openness, the fact remains they embrace it in a VERY tactical manner. Don't take this comment as a negative - I would follow the same strategic path if in their shoes, you cannot blame them. But to call out other firms like Apple as "complacent" and destined to be a "four-blade razor" is a bit off-base. Time will tell, but let's not fool ourselves in thinking Google is a non-profit, open-source, free love commune of some sort - they are as cut-throat and strategic in their strategic moves as Microsoft ever was (perhaps an overstatement, but again, time will tell!). Just my two cents from my dealings with Google over the years. (Side note - I will say, all my dealings have been positive in their outcome, for what it's worth).

Smartphones vs. PCs: Two Different Animals

I actually apologize and agree - I banged this out on a rough flight at 33,000 feet and being an English major, I absolutely should have checked and double-checked my usage of grammar. I apologize, and I do appreciate you pointing out my errors.

Thanks - I will strive to ensure these mistakes don't happen again in the future, and thank you again my friend.


On Dec 21 05:54 PM Amazing Bass wrote:

> The author's command of the English language leaves me wondering
> about the precision of his analysis.
>
> viz: each user's needs and opinions on what handset/OS/carrier serves
> their needs...
>
> 'each user' is a singular entity and, thus requires a singular pronoun,
> his or her
>
> I am using both my beloved iPhone, a Blackberry and an Android handset...
>
>
> Both indicates two. The author enumerates three.

Potential Smartphone Buyers Choosing Blackberrys Despite iPhone, Droid Hype

The conversation is fairly redundant - no single carrier, handset, or mobile OS will dominate in the same fashion Windows has for so many years. Multiple players will thrive, and based on a particular users needs and opinions on what handset/OS/carrier serves their needs better than others, they will make that choice. Every serious study (and being involved in this space heavily for years until the past eight months) leaves me 100% convinced there will be several strong players. Each has their own merits and as the industry gains critical mass, the major players (survivors) will tailor their operating systems, handset design, and carriers to cater to 4-6 primary demographics. There is plenty of room for more than BlackBerry or iPhone or Android to survive. In my not so humble opinion, all the major hardware/operating system producers will thrive based on the synergistic lift smart phones are achieving, with mid-to-late 2010 being a real tipping point in smartphones (with the upcoming upgrades to hardware/chipsets) thriving, benefiting all the current (and any future) superior smartphone producers. Watch for iPhones next incarnation with a much more powerful chipset and further advancements to their already superior operating system, and I am watching Google's/Android's moves with great interest. And yes, Blackberry will retain a very nice market share, as they do cater to a more serious business-orientated consumer - but that is not to say Android, iPhone, Nokia, Palm (although they have their work cut out for them) and others won't also have versions to challenge Blackberry's current hold on that demographic segment.

Bottom line - to many analysts are holding on tight to the historical model of the Personal Computer wars, and this is an entirely different evolution. Just my two cents, for what it is worth - good article and some good comments, great thinking! Cheers...

Rooftop Solar Generation: Ready for Prime Time?

My bad! Somehow the final sentence did not paste over from my Google Document.

Disclosure: No holdings in any of the companies referenced in this article.

Thank you for bringing that to my attention!


On Dec 01 11:26 AM ComplianceCop wrote:

> Seeking Alpha requires contributors to adhere to objective compliance
> standards.
>
> All articles must contain in the footer a disclosure statement letting
> the reader know if you hold any positions in the stocks mentioned.
> If you don’t have a position, please mention that as well.
>
> Authors agree to disclose any material relationships with companies
> whose stocks they write about or parties that stand to gain in any
> way from the viewpoint they are outlining. Examples: authors must
> disclose if they are employed by a company whose stock they are writing
> about; perform consulting for a company they write about; receive
> paid advertising revenue or any other form of sponsorship fee from
> a company they write about. This applies to narrow asset classes
> as well. For example, if an author is paid to promote a gold dealer,
> that must be disclosed in any article about gold.

What Will the U.S. Economy Look Like in 10 Years? Look to Greece

Carlos, again, you completely miss the point. "Many countries have embarked on monetization, and it has never ended well for their middle classes." You are absolutely right - but put this in historical context. AGAIN, there has never existed, ever, in human history, a global power comparable to the United States. I am not here (as I stated in my comment) espousing a particular course of action. I am here to tell you that we can indeed print our way out of this current situation, IF that is the course of action taken. Carlos, be realistic. Small Caribbean countries buy large amounts of our treasuries at auctions every month. I don't know about you, but I am doubting the Cayman Islands are holding the $30 billion in treasuries purchased at auction last month - the Federal Reserve purchased those bonds. America can issue all the debt it wants, because there are several factors that are so basic in their premise, it astounds me that people - intelligent people! - simply don't understand how the system really works:

1. The Federal Reserve (which, incidentally, is not a government institution, but a "hybrid" of sorts - many Americans have absolutely no idea that it isn't simply a branch of the Federal Government, but an independent private organization with government oversight) can indeed purchase our treasury bonds and hold them as assets with freshly printed currency. The idea that the government could liquidate the federal debt by simply printing up dollars and buying back its own bonds with them is dismissed out of hand by economists and politicians on the ground that it would produce rampant runaway inflation. But would it? Inflation results when the money supply increases faster than goods and services, and replacing government securities with cash would not change the size of the money supply. Federal securities are already money. They have been money ever since Alexander Hamilton made them the basis of the national money supply in the late eighteenth century. Converting federal securities into government-issued U.S. Notes would not cause prices to shoot up because consumers would have no more money to spend than they had before.

A "security" is a type of transferable interest representing financial value. The federal securities composing the federal debt (bills, bonds and notes) are treated by the Federal Reserve and by the market itself just as if they were money. Federal securities are traded daily in enormous volume among banks and other financial institutions around the world just as if they were money. If the government were to buy back its own bonds with cash, these instruments of financial value would merely be converted from interest-bearing notes into non-interest-bearing legal tender. The funds would move from M3 into M1 (cash and checks), but the total money supply would remain the same.

Let's go to point #2 and find out why in fact the U.S. can print money and issue debt with almost unfettered impunity...it's not some world conspiracy, but indeed a new reality.

2. American projection-of-power is now the world's new commodity. Gotta hit on this again Carlos. The United States is responsible for 41.5 per cent of the global military spend, distantly followed by the China (5.8% of world share), France (4.5%), UK (4.5%), and Russia (4%). And these numbers are actually off - for various budgeting reasons, the United States unofficially spends much more than the over $600 billion that is officially reported (spend figures are adjusted for exchange rates, as opposed to the purchasing power parity method, or PPP, which is widely accepted as suspect). Why does this matter? Because our economic power is derived from our military power. Again, I am not advocating anything here - just delivering you the facts. 63% of foreign currency reserves are in United States dollars for a reason - if the proverbial crap truly ever hits the fan anywhere on earth, what does a finite shiny commodity do for you? The U.S. Dollar is the default world fiat currency because, by its very definition, the mechanism for valuing a fiat currency is directly correlated to the ability of the government issuing the currency to ensure it remains legal tender. The United States projection-of-power is absolute, hence the U.S. dollar, and it's ability to both print currency, ensure it remains "legal tender", and issue Treasuries is at the moment infinite. That military projection-of-power, right, wrong, or indifferent, has evolved into the new "Gold Standard." The funds raised from the issuance of debt, much of which we are already monetizing, is used to maintain and increase the United States military, which in turn allows the U.S. an even larger geopolitical margin of error and the ability to print more currency and issue more debt....round and round it goes. China is not even in the outskirts of the neighborhood of playing on the United States level - we have eight carrier battle groups (each of which costs roughly the equal of Norway's annual GDP to maintain each year - amazing thought to even grasp), while China has hull of a never-completed small Soviet aircraft carrier built in the late 80's. It is currently not seaworthy. China has a navy that is only capable of guarding their coast - and even then, barely. So no "China is the New Power" baloney please - I laughed at the "Japan is the New Power" folks in the 80's, and I am giggling again now. Militarily, the U.S. could shut down access to the Pacific Ocean whenever it wished. Economically, the United States is dependent on trade with Asia, but not NEARLY as dependent as Asia is on trade with the United States. In the cold harsh reality of the world, East Asia has no real effective countermeasure to an American military or economic move.

The bottom line is, we have single-handedly saved the entire global economy with our deficits and expansion of money supply. And indeed Carlos, there is a whole new economic paradigm - I am stating that monetizing our debt would not have the devastating inflationary or currency devaluation most economic models (models that are hundreds of years old, in an era where a nation as powerful as the U.S. was inconceivable) call for with certainty. It's a brave new world, and if you don't think we are monetizing debt right now...you are just not facing reality.

I mean nothing harsh in my response, I just really want to point out geopolitical realities that affect economic predictive modeling. Greece isn't the United States. Japan isn't the United States. Zimbabwe is not the United States. No nation has ever been the United States. I am not pounding my chest with hubris...again, just the facts. Zimbabwe's devaluation strategy didn't quite work out, to say the least...but the world doesn't price it's commodities in Zimbabwe Dollars. 63% of the world's currency reserves are not held in Zimbabwe Dollars. I don't know too many major economies that peg their currency to the Zimbabwe Dollar. Not many countries are absolutely reliant on Zimbabwe as a trading partner. Zimbabwe doesn't account for 24.6% of the global GDP. Zimbabwe does not have a functional internal military, let alone a naval force of any sort, negating Zimbabwe's projection-of-power. Zimbabwe has an extremely small geopolitical margin of error. The comparison is totally irrelevant.

I truly do appreciate the debate! Cheers!


On Nov 30 05:09 AM Carlos Lam wrote:

> 1. I have been hearing about the impending doom from our deficits
> since before I could speak full sentences. And every year I smile.
> Because of America's historically incomparable projection-of-power,
> we can indeed manage our deficits. Federal spending will slow, domestic
> U.S. economic growth rates will increase, and because the world's
> economy relies on the U.S. dollar as the default global fiat currency,
> we will monetize our way out of our outstanding debts without the
> horrors and pain everyone is up in arms about. Mark my words, and
> write me back in five years - the United States economy and the Greenback
> will be as strong as ever. Period.

Wow. Gideon Gono of Zimbabwe would be proud. You somehow believe that we can print our way out of our debts without destroying our currency? Your somehow believe that foreign holders of US dollars will simply accept monetization of the debt and cheer the devaluation of their investment?

Your attitude reminds me of what the intelligensia kept saying during the 1990s, that Greenspan had ended the business cycle and that recessions were a thing of the past because of technological innovations. As Mark Twain noted, history doesn't repeat itself yet it rhymes. Many countries have embarked on monetization, and it has never ended well for their middle classes.