In some sense, my “gift” to Prof. Ronald Coase for his 99th birthday is “special”. More on this later.
For the last 20+ years of my life, many of my thinking has been shaped and influenced by Coase, and yet I have not met him in person. Of course, how much have I actually learned or understood remains a mystery. (big smile) Allow me to share two stories.
I remember some years ago during the first year of my MBA program, somehow the topic of lighthouse came up. And I, quite off-handedly, mentioned to my classmate (he majored in economics, and I majored in computer science) that lighthouse is usually given as an example of a public good but this categorization is actually wrong.
Well, to my surprise, my classmate insisted that, “No no no. Lighthouse is a public good and you cannot charge any money for the use of it.” After a minute or so of discussion, we got back to our schoolwork. To me, from that moment on, I realized I was lucky to have some special insights. I’ve learned Coase’s ideas, including those in “The Lighthouse in Economics” via Prof. Steven Cheung’s articles in Chinese when I was attending high school in Hong Kong. I have learned the importance in asking questions. And try not to take things/”established facts” for granted.
In yet another MBA class, this time an ethics class. The professor asked a simple question, something like, “Why do we have ‘company’/'corporation’?” In hope to lead to some discussions about ethics (well, it was an ethics course after all). What my professor didn’t expect was me raising my hand and answered, “To reduce transaction cost.” :)
Now, without further delay, allow me to present my “special” and virtual gift to Prof. Coase. Wishing Prof. Coase a very happy 99th birthday (in advance) and good health for many more years to come.
My “special” “gift”
This gift is “special” because I think the best gift to give to someone like Prof. Coase, who has everything he needs in the world and likely every material thing he wants, is to “pay it forward“. Prof. Coase himself doesn’t really benefit from the gift itself, it is the people who may learn from Prof. Coase that are benefitting. So I am “paying it forward” or “gifting” forward.
As you may know, the wonderfully insightful (and often funny) 2003 Coase Lecture was delivered by Prof. Coase himself. And the full lecture has been available online via Coase Institute for free download and viewing for some time now. Unfortunately, unless the person has an extremely fast internet connection and have patient to wait for an hour or two or more, downloading the 525MB quicktime video file (this is very big)can still be quite a challenge. And for those that have slower regular internet access, viewing the lecture is practically impossible.
So as a “special” gift to Prof. Coase for his 99th birthday, I have taken the initiative and spent most of the night (well, actually last night and now well into the wee hours) to compress and upload the video onto YouTube.
This “gift” is “special” also because I’ve bent quite a few rules. Since this is a gift for Prof. Coase’s 99th birthday, I hope the “deciders” don’t mind and will let me give this “gift”. :)
Hope you enjoy the 2003 Coase Lecture (in 6 parts).
My 2009 “big read” is going to be the recently published 832 pages“Just Watch Me – The Life of Pierre Elliott Trudeau: 1968-2000″ by John English. I feel it is time for me to read up on Mr. Trudeau and get an inside look of some Canadian history. The reviews of the book I’ve read are mostly positive and I hope this will be a fun read. Wish me lots of luck.
“Kate and David Bagby, who live in California, joined Avalon MP Scott Andrews in his riding just outside St. John’s Friday to bring attention to proposed Criminal Code changes.
The Bagby’s 13-month old grandson, Zachary Turner, was drowned by his mother in Conception Bay in 2003, shortly before she killed herself in a murder-suicide.“
I have the privilege to interview Kate and David when they visited Calgary in 2008, have a look of my video interview with them. You can also listen to an interview I had with Kurt who made a documentary about the case and was Andrew’s friend.
So far the opaque ACTA negotiation makes me nervous. I hope Ministers Tony Clement and James Moore knows they can’t consult us and then ignore our opinions. That will be very bad.
Like many Canadians, I want to get pay a more reasonable price and get better mobile services. I was hoping WINDmobile would have been launched by now and I will soon be able leave my current provider.
So it was very unfortunate that CRTC threw a curve ball in its decision. But I am determined and I have add WINDmobile to my Christmas/New Year wish list. I hope if enough Canadians speak out and demand mobile competitors like WINDmobile be allowed to compete in Canada, then we can soon have some decent prices and services in Canada. (Note to the Doctor Who fans out there: Remember what Martha Jones did here to defeat the monster? There is hope. :)
“Though many Canadians are frustrated in their own experiences with mobile service providers, they don’t understand the scope of the the issues at hand.
For example, did you know that wireless consumers in this country deal with:
Higher prices: Due to lack of competition and real alternatives, Canadians pay an average of 60% more for mobile wireless services than Americans according to the Telecommunications Policy Review Panel.
Staggering complaints: The Better Business Bureau released its list of top ten consumer complaint calls. Cell phone companies tops that list – soaring above car dealers, movers and even utilities. Clearly Canadian consumers aren’t being treated as they should be and they’re not happy about it.
Among the weakest in the world: Canada’s wireless industry is one of the weakest in the developing world. Merrill Lynch puts Canadian wireless penetration at 65 per cent, last among 22 developed countries (below Tunisia and Iraq). The International telecommunications Union (ITU) has tracked Canada’s decline from 35th in 1998 to 128th in 2008 – far behind many underdeveloped nations.
Oligopoly: The Canadian wireless market is dominated by three very large, very profitable players – Telus, Rogers and Bell. This is not a ‘hypercompetitive market’ as they would have you believe. WIND Mobile, is the only new entrant that offers a truly national wireless alternative.”
P.S. I am a fan of WINDmobile, but I will be less than honest if I don’t mention that I actually agree with the CRTC’s analysis when it made its decision (see further comments here) that Globalive and WINDmobile are foreign controlled. I just think it is time that our telecom laws are updated to remove the foreign ownership restriction. I don’t usually like the idea of government overruling quasi-judicial bodies’ decisions, but I will make an exception here.
Lets give Canada some needed competitions in the mobile industry by exempting WINDmobile, and lets fix the telecom laws next.
Just one truly bizarre chapter of what Iranian-Canadian journalist Maziar Bahari experienced when he was regularly beaten and threatened with execution while imprisoned in Iran for 118 days. From CBC “Iranian-Canadian journalist talks of prison ordeal” (with 38 minutes long full video) (emphasis added),
“That wasn’t the only imaginary parallel world in prison. The journalist recalled one particularly bizarre exchange with his interrogator, who believed that Jon Stewart’s political satire, The Daily Show, offered proof that his prisoner was a spy and was working with other spies.
Bahari had participated in a send-up interview with Canadian comic Jason Jones, whom the interrogator didn’t realize was just an actor on the television comedy and not a real spy.
“One day my interrogator told me that, ‘We have video evidence of you working as a spy,’ and then when he put the DVD of The Daily Show in the laptop, I just thought, ‘Oh my God.’”
Bahari said Jones acted like “this really red-neck American who didn’t know anything about the Middle East and pretended to be a spy. He called me Mr. Pistachio.”
“And I told my interrogator, I hope you’re not suggesting that he’s a real spy and he said, ‘Well, he looks very suspicious, and why should he pretend to be a spy — why should he choose you for an interview?’”"
Good news for non-lawyers to understand U.S. legal opinions. Now, I hope Google will index Canadian legal opinions soon too. Here is an excerpt from Google’s announcement,
“Starting today, we’re enabling people everywhere to find and read full text legal opinions from U.S. federal and state district, appellate and supreme courts using Google Scholar. You can find these opinions by searching for cases (like Planned Parenthood v. Casey), or by topics (like desegregation) or other queries that you are interested in. For example, go to Google Scholar, click on the “Legal opinions and journals” radio button, and try the query separate but equal. Your search results will include links to cases familiar to many of us in the U.S. such as Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education, which explore the acceptablity of “separate but equal” facilities for citizens at two different points in the history of the U.S. But your results will also include opinions from cases that you might be less familiar with, but which have played an important role.”
Nov 15, 2009 Update: Here is an insightful comment from Patent Baristas on the Bilski case where Stephen listed some of the questions a few of the Supreme Court Justices asked at the oral argument.
Oral arguments in the case, “Bernard L. Bilski and Rand A. Warsaw v. David J. Kappos,” have been highly anticipated. Often referred to as the “Bilski” case, it was originally brought by an inventor who’d tried to win a business-method patent for a means to hedge against changes in commodity prices.
An array of technology giants, including Microsoft Corp. (MSFT 28.63, +0.11, +0.39%), IBM Corp. (IBM 124.03, +0.54, +0.44%) and others, have since taken a keen interest in the case, which could affect portions of their patent portfolios.
Microsoft, IBM and others operate impressive intellectual property operations, securing thousands of patents every year. However, the companies would also prefer to see some limits placed on the scope of what can be patented.
Noted examples of business methods that have won patents for their inventors — and ridicule from others for being overly broad – include a means to train janitors using video displays, and to entice customers to order more fast food. Technology companies generally see the granting of such patents as a threat to genuine innovation.
But a decision in the Bilski case may also cut into technology companies’ ability to patent software, legal experts say.
If the Supreme Court fully affirms a federal appeals court’s prior decision in Bilski, it could help invalidate many of the software patents now held by companies, and strike a blow at the intellectual property portfolios that underpin their business models.
CRTC has handed down its decision (Telecom Decision CRTC 2009-678 or PDF). A scan of the CRTC decision leads me to look at the last two pages of charts plus 107, 108 and 119 summing up the decision,
“107. The concentration of debt and equity in the hands of a single entity can create an opportunity for influence. In circumstances such as the present, where a company is heavily debt financed, this opportunity can translate into significant influence over the venture by the debt holder.”
“108. The magnitude of the debt provided by Orascom, the relative debt to equity financing, and the fact that the debt is concentrated in the hands of a single entity cause the Commission concern with the loans as a source of Orascom influence. The modifications to the covenants and terms of the loans do little to reduce this concern. Furthermore, the Commission notes that covenants similar to those deleted from the Orascom loan agreements are still contained in Schedule A to the Shareholders’ Agreement.”
“119. In light of all the above, the Commission finds that Globalive is controlled in fact by Orascom, a non-Canadian. Therefore, the Commission concludes that Globalive does not meet the requirements set out in section 16 of the Act and is not currently eligible to operate as a telecommunications common carrier.”
I think less competition is bad for Canadian consumers. By the way, in the happier times of Sept 2008, I conducted a phone interview with Tony Lacavera, CEO of Globalive, after they launched a few interesting initiatives that I thought would be good for Canadian consumers.
“The commission found it particularly important that Orascom owns 65.1 per cent of the equity, has entered into a strategic technical arrangement with Globalive, controls and holds the ‘Wind’ brand under which Globalive will operate, and holds the overwhelming majority of the outstanding debt,” the regulator said.
“The commission therefore determines that Globalive has not met the requirements of the ownership and control regime and is therefore not currently eligible to operate as a Canadian telecommunications common carrier.”
The CRTC prescribed a list of changes the company could theoretically make in order to bring itself into compliance, which would include amendments to the composition of its board of directors, liquidity rights and the threshold for veto rights.
However, the fact that Orascom controls almost all of the company’s debt is a factor that cannot be easily resolved.”
“In its decision, the CRTC came to a different conclusion than Industry Canada and has indicated that Globalive Wireless is not in compliance with the Canadian ownership and control requirements set out in the Telecommunications Act.
“Having already received approval from Industry Canada, we are extremely disappointed that the CRTC has come to a different conclusion,” said Anthony Lacavera, Chairman, Globalive Wireless Management Corp. “This is a bad day for Canadian consumers. Canadians deserve competition in wireless and this decision represents a major step backwards.””
*******
Oct 29, 2009 Morning: Looking forward to the CRTC Globalive decision to be announced later today after markets close. Here is an excerpt from a Canadian Press report,
If the CRTC decides that Globalive is Canadian enough to compete as a new national cellphone company, it’s a decision that’s likely to shake up foreign ownership rules.
Toronto-based Globalive wants to be Canada’s fourth major wireless carrier and compete with Rogers, (TSX:RCI.B), Bell (TSX:BCE) and Telus (TSX:T) for consumers who want to buy cellphones. But before Globalive can go ahead with its launch later this fall, it must survive a CRTC ruling expected Thursday on its ownership and structure.
[... RBC Capital Markets analyst Jonathan] Allen said if the CRTC approves Globalive’s bid, it will likely launch in Toronto and Calgary next month.
Egg on Mao: The Story of an Ordinary Man who Defaced an Icon and Unmasked a dictatorship by Denise Chong in now in stores.
—
There is something appropriate about Lu Decheng having to hear his own remarkable tale of rebellion, suffering and survival read to him by his 10-year-old son in the peaceful setting of his Calgary home.
Tony, Lu’s first-born, arrived in the city with his mother in 2007. It was one year after his father escaped from China, bringing an end to a 20-year ordeal that has cemented his reputation as one of the heroes of China’s pro-democracy movement.
When Lu arrives at the Calgary Herald for an interview to discuss a new book written about him by Ottawa author Denise Chong, Tony and his baby brother Michael are in tow.
Chatty and inquisitive, the bespectacled boy begins chattering about his school, his good marks and his preference for math.
Despite being in the country for only two years, he speaks English as flawlessly as any 10-year-old Canadian. So it was up to him to read parts of Chong’s book, Egg on Mao: The Story of An Ordinary Man Who Defaced An Icon and Unmasked A Dictatorship, to his father, who still struggles with English.
It tells the often chilling story of how Decheng and two friends threw paint-filled eggs at the towering portrait of Mao Zedong amid increasingly tense student protests at Tiananmen Square in 1989. It was a youthful act–reckless, naive and perhaps ill-advised since it plunged the now-45-year-old into a miserable nine years of imprisonment and torture.
Looks like what I expected had come true. Now, I may not agree with many Wildrose Alliance ideas, I still want to congratulate Ms. Danielle Smith for winning the Wildrose Alliance leadership. Here are more news from CTV Calgary (with video), Canadian Press, and Edmonton Sun. (From CP, “Of 8,297 votes cast, Smith took 6,295 to 1,905 for Dyrholm. There were 97 spoiled ballots.”)
If the rising of the Wildrose Alliance means the main stream political parties like the Progressive Conservatives, Liberals, and NDPs are forced listen more to their supporters and Albertans in general, then this may turn out to be a good thing for long run.
Danielle, I want to congratulate you for being elected as Leader of Wildrose Alliance. I hope your voice will be good for Alberta. I mean it.
P.S. It should be noted that I still have an open and unresolved complaint with Elections Alberta re the Calgary-Glenmore by-election. But today, it is Danielle’s day. Congrats again Danielle.
“In this U.S. Supreme Court case, the Court was asked whether a patent holder can seek royalties from the downstream third-party purchaser. The Court concluded unanimously that it could not. Writing for the Court, Justice Clarence Thomas relied on the theory of “patent exhaustion,” which provides that a patented item’s initial authorized sale terminates all patent rights to that item, denying LGE royalties from companies down the line of commerce. The panel of experts discuss the decision, and the implications of the decision for patent law and licensing agreements.”
If I were a betting man, I would put my money on Danielle Smith winning in this saturday Wildrose Alliance leadership vote.
As I wrote in a previous post, Alberta politics is not boring anymore. And if Smith wins, the Progressive Conservatives, Liberals, and NDPs better act fast. I suspect all these parties are already in discussion on how and what to do with the rising of Wildrose Alliance. How smart will their strategies be, only time will tell. In a sense, if rise of Wlidrose Alliance brings politicians from all parties closer and more in tune to Albertans’ wishes, I think it is a good thing.
At the end of the day, what matters is the welfare of all Albertans, regardless of their political affiliations. So good luck to all Albertans.
With my current outstanding complaint with Elections Alberta, I have lost confidence with Elections Alberta’s ability to hold open and fair elections.
Sure, there are more “widespread fraud” in Afghan, but until my complaint with Elections Alberta, I had zero doubt with Elections Alberta’s ability, but I was sadly mistaken.
So very sadly, if you ask me today, do I have confidence in Elections Afghan’s or Elections Alberta’s abilities to hold open and fair elections, I will have to politely say no.
Posted by kempton 
Posted by kempton 
Posted by kempton 
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Subscribe by email
