To win post-pandemic, startups need remote-first growth teams

(Source: techcrunch.com

Eric Eldon@eldon / June 16, 2021


Growth leaders used to build key relationships across a company while working together in a real-life office. Those relationships could carry over through the pandemic, but let’s say you’re a new company and you’re remote-first.

How do you build this complex collaboration from scratch?

Growth marketer and investor Susan Su tells us that the solution is not just more software tools. In the interview below, she says that after the pandemic, startup founders will need to develop a mentality that places growth at the center of company strategy.

Consultants and agencies can be great additions to this effort, especially if they have previously solved the types of problems you face. (In fact, TechCrunch is asking founders who have worked with growth marketers to share a recommendation in this survey. We’ll use your answers to find more experts to interview.)

Su is currently the head of portfolio strategy for Sound Ventures, previously a growth leader at Stripe and the first hire at Reforge. She also shared a few thoughts on market opportunities after the pandemic in the full interview below. E-commerce is mainstream for good, she says, even as we all try to step away from screens more often. However, many social and mobile sectors are mature, and it’s going to be even harder for startups to compete as real-world activities absorb more time.

Don’t forget: Susan Su will also appear at our Early Stage virtual event on July 8 (and answer questions directly).

How are you seeing startups manage changes in user engagement as more people exit pandemic lockdowns and adjust their daily lives?

As we exit the pandemic, I expect that we’ll see a natural and obvious spike in some consumer activity that will roll up to midsized businesses and enterprises. Just like with the onset of the pandemic, we’ll see uneven results across sectors:

E-commerce boomed during the pandemic but was really an augmentation of an already-accelerating trend toward digital commerce and streamlined logistics. I don’t think we backtrack from e-commerce because habit formation around online shopping has been building for years; we would be backtracking to an age long before 2020, and that’s not going to happen.

New social-mobile experiences also boomed during the pandemic, but there’s still a valid question around whether 15 months or so is enough time to become part of the ingrained infrastructure of daily life. We are living in an age of mature platforms, so every new service is stealing time away from an existing service. As with pre-pandemic growth, their success rests upon fast-accumulating network effects and great, sticky core product experience. Now that we have parks, friends and dinners out calling to us again, it’s a real test of how compelling some of these new value propositions really are, and whether they can continue to demonstrate their relevance in a more hybridized online-offline world.

That said, the pandemic was an enormous constraint on human society and [the] economy, and these kinds of constraints often breed innovation that doesn’t go away. We will evolve, but we can never go back. It sounds cheesy but it’s true.

Some aspects of the pandemic, like remote work, appear to have radically changed certain industries. How will these societal changes impact how the typical startup thinks about growth?

Growth will always be growth — that is, a process of iterative experimentation to identify and solve customer problems, and then scale those solutions in order to reach and convert bigger and bigger audiences. Platform changes like iOS 14 or Facebook’s periodic algorithm adjustments will have a bigger impact in the near term on the technical functioning of growth, and these aren’t specifically pandemic-related.

One area to watch is how growth teams are built and operated. Growth is a horizontal function that touches many different parts of the org, including product, engineering, marketing, comms and design. Many startup teams have already been working with collaboration tools even while they sat in the same office, but growth is about more than just using tools. The most effective growth leaders succeed by building relationships across the organization; it’s like the fable of Stone Soup — you’re creating this meal that will feed everyone, but you also need each person to bring a pinch of salt, or a dash of pepper, or one carrot, and that requires socialization and relationship-building. I’ll be very interested to see how new growth leaders onboard remote-only teams and what approaches they take to this “networking” need within the function.

From the days of growth hacking on social platforms, growth marketing is now an established part of the world. But it’s not necessarily the main expertise of a startup founder, even if it needs to be. So, how should they think about addressing growth marketing in 2021? What are the essentials they should do in their roles?

Every founder needs to have a growth mentality. They don’t need to memorize all the right buttons to push in an ads dashboard, but they need to be familiar and comfortable with the core work of gap-finding. That said, founders are by definition entrepreneurial — their company exists because they saw an opportunity that no one else did, and this is the fundamental work of growth as well.

Founders will fail if they adopt a mentality that someone else can or should do it for them. The founder’s job is to supply ambition and opinions, and then magnetize high-quality talent to come and pull the levers and bring their creative vision to life. There are many people who can do growth marketing — that is, they know how the platforms work, they understand the rules and the playbooks. But there are very few who can come up with truly visionary strategies that change the game altogether — those people become founders, and those companies become household names. So for a founder, I’d say the most important growth work is to continue to know your market and customer better than anyone else in the whole world, have an opinion about what’s missing, and work to bring the best talent to come in alongside you and be a thought partner, not just a button pusher.

With limited resources, how should early-stage companies think about what to focus on?

This is going to depend on the goals of your company. Are you planning to raise money and need to demonstrate certain KPIs? Are you bootstrapping and need to keep the lights on? Resources should always be allocated to the most strategic purposes, with the longest-term view you can afford. For some companies, this could mean forgoing revenue to focus on viral or word-of-mouth-driven user acquisition to demonstrate to future investors that there’s something special here. For other companies, perhaps in lower volume categories like enterprise, it’s about bringing a few strategic logos into the family as a signal to later customers and other stakeholders, including future employees and investors.

One thing that early-stage companies should always be focused on is building a top-shelf employer brand. You will only ever be as good as the talent you attract to your company, and interestingly growth can actually play a role in this. The best designers, engineers and product people are often flowing toward the companies that have the best growth. In that way, it’s a highly strategic role and function.

What do startups continue to get wrong?

You can’t truly outsource growth or any other core function; you can’t tack on customer acquisition after product development. At the end of the day, if you really think about it, all a company is, is a customer-acquisition engine. This needs to be core; wake up every day and think about growth, not just to hit revenue or user KPIs, but to build the company that the best people are clamoring to work at. It’s not about finding someone sufficient to solve your near-term problems; it’s about framing problems in a way that’s so compelling to the most creative, hardest-working people so that they can’t get it out of their heads. Go for talent moonshots, and figure out how to close them. The rest will fall in line from there.

When should a founder feel comfortable getting help from an outside expert or agency?

Anytime. Agencies are great. They are an extension of your talent, and the best agencies aren’t selling you — they have to be sold on your problem because they have their pick of companies just like yours. That’s the agency or outside expert you want to work with, because they’ll have a priceless perspective from the other best-in-class founders and teams they’ve worked with that they can bring to your challenge. Any agency can run Facebook ads (it’s not rocket science), but you want to find the team that’s solved the gnarliest problems for your hero companies. Then you’ll get not just an ads manager, but a teacher.

Demand for developers is soaring - and employers are struggling to hire

(Source: zdnet.com

The latest data shows that tech workers are in high demand - but the challenge now is to find the right candidates.

By Daphne Leprince-Ringuet | June 17, 2021 


Tech jobs have rarely been hotter: job search engine Adzuna has reported that for the past few months, there have been consistently over 100,000 tech job offers per week live on the platform, with one week in May even seeing an unprecedented peak of 132,000 offers.

The data, which was compiled for the UK government's digital economy council, suggests that the industry is recovering from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic at pace. In comparison, last June saw tech vacancies fall to less than 44,000 offers.

But according to the council, the new figures aren't only reflective of a strong comeback from a year of crisis. Tech hiring hasn't been this high since 2016.

This is largely due to increasing investment in UK tech companies, says the council. Last year, VC investment reached £11.6 billion ($16 billion); only six months into 2021, UK tech companies have already raised £11 billion ($15.3 billion) in venture funding, putting the industry well on track to surpass previous numbers. In 2019, UK tech companies received a total $13.2 billion.

"When you look at the amount that has been raised since the end of 2020, the numbers are really consistently strong," Liz Scott, head of entrepreneur engagement at tech networking organization Tech Nation, which is part of the government council, tells ZDNet. "I don't think we are looking at 2021 being strong in comparison to a pandemic year, but at being back to record-breaking numbers."

This is not the case across the board. A separate report published by advisory company Real Business Rescue shows that the first quarter of 2021 saw 47,000 small and medium IT businesses in significant financial distress as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. That's a 15% increase compared to the previous quarter, which the organization says is placing 185,000 jobs in IT at risk.

The healthier numbers reported by the government council, therefore, hide a more complex reality in which not all businesses are thriving.

As Scott explains, VC investment has abounded for a pool of companies that are showing the most promise; but for many others, the effects of the global health crisis continue to be felt harshly.

"There is some nuance when you look at the two sides of this coin," says Scott. "There are the tech businesses that are striving and those who have perhaps not managed to adjust and pivot quite as quickly as they might need to."

When it comes to job seekers, however, the data is clear: the tech companies that are growing are hiring, and fast. And without much surprise, one of the most in-demand jobs across the UK is software developer, for which there were nearly 10,000 vacancies in April 2021 alone.

Just as popular are AI and data science jobs such as AI engineers or programmers. A recent report from Ipsos Mori found that close to 110,500 job openings were posted in the AI labor market last year – double the number of vacancies registered in 2014 and a 16% increase from 2019.

With an average salary of almost £59,000 ($82,314), these AI roles are good opportunities, which Scott argues could "absolutely transform people's lives."

The problem? There aren't nearly enough candidates to fill all of the empty roles. In the AI industry specifically, Ipsos Mori reported that almost seven in ten firms have struggled to fill at least one vacancy in the past two years, typically because of the lack of appropriate skills among applicants.

Scott explains that the issue of talent is one of the greatest concerns among decision makers in tech businesses that are scaling fast.

"It is probably the number one challenge that we hear our founders talk to us about. Often they have gone off and raised this big round, and once the funding campaign is done with, they are really concerned with how they are going to find the next 200 people to grow their organization," says Scott. "We all know access to capital is incredibly important, but this is something we are asked on a daily basis – 'can you help me find the talent that I need.'"

The rise of remote working is likely to provide some solutions. With almost one in four advertised IT vacancies marked as remote, business leaders can now count on talent from across the country – and even the world – to join their ranks.

But WFH is also a double-edged sword: leaders in some parts of the country might find that the developers in their region are now able to work for a London-based company with higher salaries, meaning that there is a risk of a national virtual brain-drain, warns Scott.

Ultimately, the only way to ensure that tech companies find the right candidates is to provide job applicants with the relevant skills. This is something that the UK government is actively investing in: last year, for example, a "Lifetime Skills Guarantee" launched to provide a free college course to adults without an A-level qualification in subjects such as computer science, coding or cybersecurity.

An online-learning platform called the Skills Toolkit also opened to encourage adults staying at home to build up their skills, ranging from using email and social media to understanding the fundamentals of digital marketing.

Initiatives abound from the private sector, too: earlier this month, a free two-year coding school founded by entrepreneur Brent Hoberman launched in London, with the promise that students get a guaranteed job at a top tech firm after graduation. Called 01Founders, the institution has partnerships with companies like Peloton, Nominet and Faculty.

Bootcamps and short courses are also becoming increasingly popular. Google, for example, offers a $200 "professional machine-learning engineer" certification, while IBM has launched a six-course certificate for AI engineering on Coursera.

These efforts are already showing results, says Scott, and the talent pipeline for tech jobs is expanding; but many challenges remain.

"There is a more healthy pipeline for entry and junior-level technical talent," says Scott. "But often there is a struggle with that next-level – going from being a developer to supervising or leading a team."

As tech businesses grow, employers are finding themselves in need of workers that can handle projects in marketing, finance, project management or customer experience. On top of technical skills, therefore, there is increasingly a need for more business-oriented talents in the industry.

"One of the things I would absolutely love to see more of is the sort of initiative that takes people who are not strictly technical from an IT perspective, who are not data scientists or AI analysts, but have got really important other skills that we know tech businesses need now," says Scott. "The bootcamps and programmes we've got are fantastic, but I want to see that same level of intervention for people who perhaps haven't started out life in the tech sector and want to bring their skills."

In many ways, this also highlights the need to expand businesses' access to a more diverse pool of candidates, and from all parts of the country.

The government council's new data shows that London and the South East still have the strongest tech hiring figures in the UK, with the capital boasting around 43,500 vacancies in IT. Regions like the North West and the West Midlands are catching up fast, but Scott insists that initiatives to upskill the workforce will have to reach "everywhere else" too.

Millennials all about the chat when shopping

(Source: retailcustomerexperience.com)

June 15, 2021

A hefty number, 82%, of U.S. millennials want to buy things via chat apps and 88% are already busy using the technology to communicate with brands.

Those are prime findings from Clickatell's second annual Chat Commerce Trends Report.

The report, which polled more than 1,000 U.S. millennials, was conducted by Dimensional Research for the mobile communications and chat commerce vendor, according to a press release.

The report also noted why millennials are embracing the technology:

  • 48% can save time and easily get a quick response.
  • 43% can respond to a chat when it is convenient for them.
  • 41% can keep all conversations in the same place.
  • 38% can use an app that they are already using on a regular basis.
  • 36% want their conversations in one place so any agent can pick up with all history immediately there.
  • 34% don't need to install other apps.
  • 25% want businesses to easily verify their identity or personal information.
  • 24% want businesses to send offers that are specific to them or their account.
  • 19% don't want to speak to a live person.
Well more than half of millennials, 71%, are using chat apps daily with top platforms including Facebook Messenger, Apple iMessage, WhatsApp, Snapchat and Instagram.

"Younger consumers have widely moved to chat and are ready to do business on chat," Pieter de Villiers, CEO and co-founder of Clickatell, said in the release. "This research shows they value the convenience and speed of doing business via their favorite chat apps. Businesses will gain a competitive edge by meeting this increasingly influential group of consumers where they are, which is on chat."

Additional findings include:

  • 89% of millennials want to do business in chat.
  • 54% of millennials have received a message through a chat app about an order pickup, delivery or package arrival.
  • 38% have received a link via chat to make a payment.
  • 41% have used a link via chat to book or confirm an order, appointment or a reservation.

Hitting the Books: How memes spread through society like a 'mind virus'

(Source: engadget.com

Information doesn't just want to be free, it wants to thrive.

Andrew Tarantola | 06.19.21

The struggle for survival is not always limited to animate objects. Ideas can be expressed just as biological genes are, compete for attention-based resources, replicate themselves through discussion, and be encoded with the written word. In The Ascent of Information, award winning New York Times author Caleb Scharf explores humanity's unique penchant for maintaining stores of information outside of ourselves and the steps we'll soon have to take if we want to hang on to the 20 quintillion bits of data we produce every day. In the excerpt below, Scharf examines the surprisingly lifelike ways that ideas evolve, compete and spread.


The Ascent of Information cover

The Ascent of Information coverPenguin Random House


Excerpted from The Ascent of Information by Caleb Scharf. Copyright © 2021 by Caleb Scharf. Excerpted by permission of Penguin Random House LLC, New York. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.


In an effort to provide another example of the phenomenon of selfishness, Dawkins gave a name to the now familiar concept of memes, which I briefly mentioned at the start of this book. These “mind viruses” —to use Dawkins’s provocative description — are ideas that are not just readily spread but can also induce new behaviors in their carriers. Indeed, the spreading of a meme is itself an induced behavior, whether it’s through a human conversation or a share on social media.

Dawkins’s term crystallized thinking on a phenomenon that had long piqued people’s interest. Back in 1880 Thomas Huxley (known as “Darwin’s Bulldog” for his support of evolutionary theory) wrote “The struggle for existence holds as much in the intellectual as in the physical world. A theory is a species of thinking, and its right to exist is coextensive with its power of resisting extinction by its rivals.”

Memes can also act as if they are selfish, because sometimes they’re detrimental to their carriers. Humans are prone to becoming obsessed with ideas that can lead to disadvantage or even death. Starving artists, impassioned protestors, religious zealots, thrill-seekers, and political ideologues can all seem to be on a course to self-destruction because of ideas that they nurse and propagate throughout the world.

To explain these seemingly irrational patterns, we can say that the memes, or ideas, are simply using their carriers in the way that biological viruses hijack their hosts, or that genes use organism-based vehicles. Human minds are a landscape in which ideas can propagate and compete with each other, following rules that strongly resemble those of natural selection. What happens to the humans, good or bad, is mostly of secondary importance to the continuation of the information, its further replication.

This vision is intriguing, disturbing, and enormously contentious. To this day it’s borderline unacceptable in many scientific circles to treat memes as anything worthy of scientific analysis beyond their bearing a superficial similarity to what happens in biology (and to be clear, Dawkins never really suggested otherwise). This is especially true when it comes to ascribing mutualism to memes and genes — speculating that the evolutionary fitness of genes might be impacted by memes, and vice versa. That hasn’t stopped a lot of ink being spilled on memes (filling up a corner of the dataome, with some irony), with certain scholars proposing formalisms of so-called memetics, and a central role for them in cultural evolution.

I’m not going to jump very far down that particular rabbit hole here. The main reason for scientists’ conservatism toward memes is that it is enormously difficult to separate out cause and effect in a complex, inter- twined, messy set of systems like life and minds. Finding the phenomenon at the root of things, the fundamental actor, is supremely difficult. That doesn’t mean that a simplifying approach, or a universal rule, can’t be the answer. But proving that to be true is why most scientists still have jobs: it’s a long road.

With that cautionary note in mind, there is such an appetizing resemblance between the notion of replicating, evolving information encoded in genes; the existence of memes; and the characteristics of the dataome, that we have to take a look.

Previously I’ve said that I don’t think the dataome is just a collection or consequence of memes; instead, memes represent a subset of entities working across the border between the dataome and human minds. A popular catchphrase will bounce back and forth between minds and dataome. By contrast, a bus ticket or a database of winter cloud cover in Belgium, while definitely a part of the dataome, probably doesn’t spend much, if any, time in human minds.

The dataome also amplifies memes and aids in their survival. In a human culture, beliefs or values are more easily shared and resilient because they exist as commonly accessible information — in physically manifested data (like the Quran, the Bible, the Vedas, the Tripitaka, the writings of Karl Marx, or Hobbes’s Leviathan). Memes have more access to hosts and hosting media in a species with a dataome. Therefore, the better that dataome is — in ease of access, efficiency, larger size — the better it is for those memes. There are intriguing similarities between this arrangement and the arrangement of genes and organisms. As we’ll discuss shortly, a gene can’t go it alone in the world. It both relies on and contributes to the entirety of a biological system, be it a cell or a population of a species. The better those biological systems work, in terms of reproduction, repair, and diversity, to withstand changing environments, the better things are for the genes.

Today, in a way that has not really happened in the past, the information represented by genes also finds itself represented in the dataome. For instance, a very stable set of genes in terrestrial biology are those that code for some of the structures of ribosomes in single-celled organisms. Ribosomes are large molecular machines that are vital to the production of proteins. Consequently, these genes and sections of their codes haven’t evolved much at all over millions, even billions of years. A particularly well-studied set are called 16S rRNA, and thanks to genomic laboratory analyses we have decoded thousands of 16S rRNA gene sequences from different species. Those reams of data now exist within the dataome.

In other words, the information represented by 16S rRNA genes has found its way into an entirely new storage and replication system — that of books, electronic media, and countless computers and data servers across the planet. You might object that this has no significance — the 16S rRNA information is no longer really doing anything, it’s not resulting in new ribosomal molecular machines that churn out proteins in the world. It’s not exerting its original capabilities. But the point is that, in the framework of selfish genes, those outcomes were never anything more than a means to an end. If the sole reason for the existence of genes is that they can continue to be, to exist in the world, then whether the information they represent sits in an organism or in your hard drive doesn’t matter.

Of course, the dataome might struggle to continue to exist without its biological minders... In that sense, the original function of 16S rRNA in the organic world is still critically important. But now so too is its function as an object of intellectual curiosity for human minds, for scientific research, and perhaps for future genetic engineering. All of which select it for maintenance and replication within the dataome.

There’s an argument to be made that none of this should be surprising because the processes of gene replication in biology, and the ways in which genes actually evolve, are already far from simple.

3 Ways to Pay for Your 2021 Vacation

(Source: fool.com)  

by Maurie Backman | June 19, 2021


Planning a trip this year? Here's how to pay for it.


Many people spent the bulk of 2020 cooped up at home due to coronavirus-related concerns. And now that things are looking better as far as the pandemic goes, a lot of people are gearing up to take a vacation this year.

But how will you pay for that trip? Here are some options to look at.


1. Your savings


Many people don't have money sitting around in the bank. But if you have a chunk of cash in savings, that's generally your best bet for paying for a vacation. That way, you won't have to rack up any debt and pay interest on it -- interest that will only add to the cost of your trip.

That said, don't tap your emergency fund to cover your vacation costs. That money should be reserved for unplanned expenses only. If you have money available on top of what you need for emergencies (which is generally three to six months of living costs), then by all means, take a withdrawal. But otherwise, seek out an alternative way to pay.


2. A vacation loan


If you don't have savings to pay for a trip, then a vacation loan could be your next best bet. A vacation loan is a personal loan you take out to fund your travels.

The great thing about personal loans is that they let you borrow money for any purpose, and that includes getting away. And to be clear, when you approach a bank or lending institution for a vacation loan, they may simply refer to it as a personal loan, so don't worry -- that's what you're looking for.

The upside of a vacation loan (or a personal loan for vacation purposes) is that you'll generally pay less interest on it than you would with a credit card. On the other hand, you will pay some amount of interest, which means your trip will cost you more than it would if you were to pay cash (or put it on a credit card and pay it off right away).

If you want to snag a competitive interest rate on a personal loan, you'll need a strong credit score. Personal loans are unsecured, which means they're not backed by a specific asset. (Whereas auto loans, for example, are secured loans, and the vehicles they finance are used as collateral so that if a borrower falls behind on payments, that vehicle can be repossessed.) As such, your lender is relying on your borrowing history and creditworthiness to assign an interest rate to you. So it's in your best interest to make sure your score is in good shape before you apply.


Credit card points


Charging a vacation on a credit card is generally not a wise move because credit cards are notorious for carrying hefty interest rates. On the other hand, if you have credit card miles or reward points you can cash in, that's a great way to pay for some or all of your trip. You might, for example, be able to score yourself a free flight or a few free nights of lodging at your destination.

After grappling with a pandemic for over a year, we all deserve a vacation. Figure out your best option for paying for yours so your experience isn't marred by needless financial stress.

65% of Americans Make This Mistake After Investing in Crypto

(Source: fool.com

by Lyle Daly | June 20, 2021

Not holding on to your crypto could be a decision you regret.


Crypto is on the rise, with a study by The Ascent finding that over 50 million Americans are likely to buy crypto in the next year. Right now, most buyers purchase crypto as an investment. Nearly 67% of those who own or have owned crypto said that was a reason they bought it.

Unfortunately, a large portion of buyers also make a serious mistake with their crypto -- they sell it too quickly. About 65% sell within a year of buying crypto, and over half sell it within six months.

In select cases, it can make sense to unload crypto in less than a year. However, you're usually better off when you buy crypto as a long-term investment. Here's why.


It gives your crypto time to grow

Even though most buyers look at crypto as an investment, many aren't using the best investing strategy. The approach that has stood the test of time is investing for the long haul. Buy cryptocurrencies that you believe will increase in value, and hold on to them for at least three to five years.

To date, this has been the method that has produced the biggest gains with cryptocurrency. Here are examples of gains the top coins have made over the last five years:
  • Market-leader Bitcoin turned $10,000 into $670,000.
  • The second-largest cryptocurrency, Ethereum, turned $10,000 into $1.85 million.
If you had bought either of those five years ago and sold within the year, you could have made money. But you wouldn't have made nearly as much as you would have by holding on for longer.

There's no guarantee that you'll profit by keeping crypto for years. It's a high-risk investment, and it's very volatile. Long-term investing simply gives you the best chance of success. Short-term investing is much more difficult, because success depends on getting in at the right time, and it's impossible to predict price movements.

If you don't plan to stick with your investment for the long haul, you may be pressured to sell at the first big price drop. Or, if the price increases, you could feel tempted to take your profits and potentially miss out on future gains.


You pay less in taxes and fees

There are a couple of extra costs when selling crypto within a year. The big one is short-term capital gains tax.

Whenever you make a profit selling or exchanging a cryptocurrency, the amount you earn is capital gains. The IRS requires that you report capital gains and pay taxes on them. You pay either short-term or long-term capital gains tax, depending on whether you held the crypto for more than one year. Short-term capital gains are taxed as part of your income. Long-term capital gains have lower tax rates.

If you keep your crypto for longer than a year, then you pay less in taxes when you sell it, because it will be considered a long-term capital gain. You also don't need to pay any taxes on it until you sell. Those 65% of consumers who sell crypto within a year end up paying more in taxes.

In addition, you need to pay transaction fees when you sell crypto. These aren't too expensive with the best cryptocurrency apps and exchanges, but they're still a cost you pay for selling. By limiting how often you sell crypto, you pay less fees.

Selling crypto within a year isn't always a bad decision. For example, if something changes and you no longer think a crypto is a good bet, then selling it could be the right decision.

Outside of those rare exceptions, the most effective strategy for investors is to play the long game, and that applies with both stocks and crypto. Let's assume you buy a crypto because you believe in its value. If you're right, you'll likely make more money by holding on to it compared to selling it too soon. And you'll save on taxes and fees, which also helps you maximize your profits.


Buy and sell crypto on an expert picked exchange

There are hundreds of platforms around the world that are waiting to give you access to thousands of cryptocurrencies. And to find the one that's right for you, you'll need to decide what features that matter most to you.

To help you get started, our independent experts have sifted through the options to bring you some of our best cryptocurrency exchanges for 2021. Check out the list here and get started on your crypto journey, today.

Regulators Have Proposed Capital Rules at Banks for Crypto Assets. Here's How It Would Work

(Source: fool.com

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision's proposed regulation would have banks hold different levels of capital for different types of crypto assets.


Bram Berkowitz Jun 20, 2021

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), a global forum of central banks and regulators that essentially sets the pace for banking regulation around the world, just released a proposal for how regulators should require banks to treat crypto assets. If passed, the proposal could have far-ranging implications for how willing banks are to hold crypto assets. Let's take a look at what BCBS is proposing.


Capital requirements for crypto assets

Currently, most banks don't have a ton of exposure to crypto assets, but soon enough, many banks may allow customers to buy, sell, and hold cryptocurrencies like bitcoin (CRYPTO:BTC) as demand for crypto has surged. One of the big parts of bank regulation is how much capital banks have to set aside for certain assets such as loans in order to prepare for potential losses. The main part of what BCBS is trying to do is determine an appropriate amount of capital that banks need to hold to account for potential losses they may face on crypto assets.

The first piece of BCBS's proposal is splitting different crypto assets into three different groups -- 1a, 1b, and 2 -- which will have different forms of regulation. 1a crypto assets are tokenized traditional assets, which are just like real assets such as real estate or art that are represented by digital tokens that can be issued on a blockchain network. 1b crypto assets are basically stablecoins, cryptocurrencies that are attached to another, ideally more stable asset such as the U.S. dollar or maybe a commodity like gold. Lastly, group 2 crypto assets are cryptocurrencies like bitcoin and Ethereum (CRYPTO:ETH), which have been extremely volatile.

Banks calculate the capital they need to hold for potential loans losses by taking the value of the asset, multiplying by the risk-weight percentage of that specific asset, and then typically multiplying that number by the bank's target capital requirement percentage (usually 8% to 12% these days). So to make things simple, let's say you have a $100 commercial loan with a risk weight of 150%, and the bank's minimum capital requirement is 8%. The bank would need to have $12 in reserves to support the loan ($100 x 1.5 x .08).

BCBS is proposing for 1a tokenized assets to have similar capital requirements to those of traditional bank assets with the potential for capital add-ons. But for group 2 crypto assets, which are riskier, BCBS is dropping the hammer by requiring banks to assign a risk weighting of 1,250%. To provide some comparison, a standard residential mortgage, which is not considered to be a very risky type of loan, may get a risk-weighted percentage of 50%. The 1,250% rating essentially means that for every $100 of bitcoin or Ethereum exposure a bank has on its balance sheet, it will need to set aside $100 in capital ($100 x 12.5 x .08).

The proposal for 1b stablecoins is not as harsh as for crypto assets like bitcoin but not as lenient as for tokenized assets. BCBS is proposing a risk weight for stablecoins that incorporates the asset that the stablecoin is pegged to plus the risk weight of an unsecured loan, which might be 100% or more, so it's certainly not insignificant. One other aspect of the BCBS proposal is that it does not plan to let any crypto assets qualify as eligible high-quality liquid assets (HQLA), which factor into certain regulatory ratios banks must abide by, such as the leverage ratio and liquidity coverage ratio. This is interesting because most crypto assets are considered to be highly liquid, so it would make sense for BCBS to consider allowing 1a or 1b crypto assets to count as HQLA, although BCBS did say it would continue to further investigate the matter.


Final takeaway

With such a high bar of capital required to hold crypto assets on the balance sheet, BCBS' proposal would very likely discourage banks from doing things like deploying excess liquidity into crypto assets like bitcoin and holding it on their balance sheet. Still, I don't think the regulation would prevent banks from serving as custodians for clients' crypto assets and conducting payments activities for crypto clients.

Also, bitcoin seemed to shake off the announcement of the potential regulations with its price gaining on the news. Many saw BCBS' attention to the matter as proof that cryptocurrencies will be a part of the larger financial system. But ultimately, the proposal issued by BCBS is still preliminary, and the organization is now seeking feedback from stakeholders. It could very well change and take a good deal of time to implement, but it's certainly something to keep an eye on.

Strategies for Dealing With Negative Feedback. And Benefitting From It.

(Source: entrepreneur.com

Too many business leaders don't know how to assess risk and wisely respond to negative perceptions, both in-house and external.

Michael Toebe
ENTREPRENEUR LEADERSHIP NETWORK WRITER
Founder of Reputation-Quality.com
June 15, 2021 

Negative perceptions happen, inside and outside a business, and when strong enough, can take the form of a wave of anger, resentment and backlash for a company, leader or both. Painful perception-related consequences are always a risk, so what can you do to avoid them, and what can be learned if they do occur?

Business is not just products, services, value, revenue and profit. People are involved, who are often closely watching and judging decisions and behavior as acceptable or egregious. It's important therefore to accept that vocal disproval can be aimed your way. A failure to show both emotional and professional intelligence in responding to it, and promptly, and you risk being exposed additionally, not least in regular and social media. This type of mindset — whether characterized by indifference, insensitivity or aggression — is essentially playing fast and loose with risk management, reputation and financial stability.

Far better in every professional measure is assessing carefully the societal landscape and putting safeguards in place that ensure respect and care for your stakeholders, while representing yourself well to the public. In essence, the aim is to think compassionately (and thus, ethically) to foster the most productive analysis in decision-making. Learn to do this skillfully and consistently, then make it a non-negotiable standard for all staff members, and an organization will find it geometrically easier to self correct. A system thus designed will be structurally devoted to the prevention of errors — creating, effectively, insurance against mistakes of commission or omission.

How? First, become more familiar with the news. Observe incidents in which other individuals and companies fall short of expectations — the results often-expensive self-inflicted damage to reputations and bottom lines. Learn from these mistakes, and analyze the pain that resulted from them. These are invaluable lessons. Also, realize that it is not outside of the realm of possibility that you could be the next target of resentment within or outside your company — the possible consequence intense media examination, with all its destabilizing energy.

Ask yourself what governance and compliance guardrails you have set up, personally and organizationally, against possible attacks. Have you done a stress test, for example, to see if they are sufficiently strong and reliable? What structure is in place to catch problems as they begin to develop, and make certain that you see or hear about them swiftly? How specifically will you be informed about them? From whom? Will you catch everything, and if not, why not? Where are the gaps in your structure and protection?

A key component of perception insurance is empowering trustworthy people close to you and encouraging strong unhappy feedback — whistleblowing (with a verbal and written assurance of protection for staff members) — on yourself and the company so that someone outside your inner circle can’t scoop a conflict. Both can make the difference between learning of a potential crisis in time to examine and respond to it, or being publically labeled incompetent, or worse. This is a tricky proposition for executives — essentially making them vulnerable to their people, but it can do wonders for institutional wellbeing. Inviting feedback of inconvenient, upsetting and dangerous truths can be one of the best things you can do for your name, mission, career and the health and growth of a business.

The vision and commitment to engage in this type of thinking will prove invaluable, and help keep your and your company's name away from the roil and rush of virtual judge and jury and resulting negative public opinion.

Here’s how to get free money for your business

(Source: apnews.com)  

By RYAN LANE of NerdWallet | June 17, 2021

Grants have helped many businesses affected by the pandemic. Between the federal government, state programs and private organizations, small-business owners have received billions in funding they won’t need to repay.

This aid may dry up as the country shifts from relief to recovery.

“I think we are coming toward the end of this type of funding,” says Annie Donovan , chief operating officer of the Local Initiatives Support Corporation, a New York-based not-for-profit that’s provided more than $200 million in grants via COVID-19 relief programs.

But if you’re still looking for free money for your business, other small-business grants may help meet your needs. Here’s how to get them.


UNDERSTAND WHAT’S AVAILABLE

Business owners affected by the pandemic can try for federal grants, for now. The Shuttered Venue Operators Grant program, which launched in April , is open to businesses like movie theaters, museums and performance halls until its roughly $16 billion is exhausted. Applications have closed for additional grant programs like the Restaurant Revitalization Fund.

Some states continue to roll out their own grants as well. For example, the now-closed Wisconsin Tomorrow Small Business Recovery Grant program launched in May.

For non-COVID grants, the federal government is also a main source, providing hundreds of billions of dollars every year, according to Grants.gov, a government-run database of these opportunities. These awards have strict qualifications , though, so review your eligibility before applying.

Private and corporate grants may be accessible to more business owners. But there are fewer of these, and large awards have plenty of competition.

For example, the 2021 FedEx Small Business Grant Contest, which offered a grand prize that included $50,000 , exceeded 8,300 submissions — more than double the 2020 competition.

WATCH FOR OPPORTUNITIES

For federal small-business grants, visit Grants.gov. The website, managed by the Department of Health and Human Services , lists more than 1,000 awards.

State-based and corporate awards can be tougher to corral, especially as many have quick deadlines. For example, the application window for the Wisconsin Tomorrow Small Business Recovery Grant was just two weeks.

One resource that may help is GrantWatch, according to Frank LaMonaca , chairperson of the southeastern Connecticut chapter of SCORE, a nonprofit organization that helps business owners nationwide.

“It’s agnostic to whoever’s offering (funding), whether it’s private or public,” LaMonaca says.

GrantWatch charges a subscription fee for some services. With more legwork, you may be able to find untapped opportunities for free by connecting with your local SCORE chapter or Small Business Development Center.

Private grants may also recur. If you’ve found a good fit but missed the deadline, set up a reminder to apply for the next round.


HIT THE RIGHT NOTES

LaMonaca says many grant applications require short answers about why you need the money and how you’ll use it. You also may need to provide details like a business plan and financial statements.

A winning application will use this information to tell a compelling story.

“It’s important to show that your business doesn’t need to be saved,” says Stephanie Duncan, co-owner of Harmony Harvest Farm in Weyers Cave, Virginia.

She adds that it’s critical to have a focused plan for the award and remember that grantors want to see their money “evolve into something amazing.” Harmony Harvest Farm was a third-place winner in this year’s FedEx Small Business Grant Contest.

Other tips are simpler — like completing the application and sending it in on time.

Randy Scarborough , vice president of global customer engagement marketing at FedEx, said by email that the company’s contest typically has “a handful of businesses that miss deadlines or are disqualified,” usually for not meeting a requirement.


BEWARE OF SCAMS

Getting free money can often sound too good to be true. In some cases, it might be.

Before applying for a grant and providing information like a Social Security number or employer identification number, ensure its validity. Red flags may include a fee or an application requiring nothing but your personal or business information.

Donovan says to watch out for phishing scams, in which fraudsters reach out impersonating an organization such as LISC. Scrutinizing email addresses and URLs can help ensure you’re dealing with a legitimate grantor.

Also, keep track of any small-business grants you apply for. That way, you won’t be surprised — or suspicious — when you’re contacted about winning.

“Sometimes we have to call (recipients) three times,” Donovan says. “Some people have not taken the money, unfortunately.”

Mental health pros and cons of working from home

(Source: digitaljournal.com)  

Dr. Tim Sandle | June 16, 2021


As the rate of COVID-19 cases has begun to decrease in the U.S. and the number of vaccinated individuals continues to rise, many U.S. workers are heading back into the office.

Some of these workers are excited to get back into the hustle and bustle of an office environment, whereas others are quite hesitant.

June 24th is ‘National Work From Home Day’ (a new event to the U.S. calendar). Over this last year many people made the switch from working in the office to working from home, but is this a healthy change?

Dr. Teralyn Sell, psychotherapist explains to Digital Journal about how working from home impacts mental health in different ways for people.

According to Sell: “For some people working from home has been significantly better for their mental health, while for others, it may be worse. It’s likely not a fair estimate to state that solely working from home is bad for mental health, especially because the last year has been anything but typical.”

This means, says Sell, it is “likely that the combination of working from home, lack of any social interaction and immense isolation is the trifecta of poor mental health. Taking the pandemic away, however, most people say that their mental health is improved while working from home. They are able to spend more time with their family and less time on a commute to and from work fighting traffic and deadlines.”

To offer some advice, Dr. Sell’s top sets out three things to be aware of when considering the benefits and drawbacks of working from home.

1: PRO – Less time commuting means more time for yourself and with family

The one thing that we wish we had more of is time. If you work from home and establish good work and life boundaries you can easily have more built in time to spend with your family. If you aren’t battling traffic jams you may have more time to eat a good meal or even to put your kids to bed without evening chaos. Additionally, you might be able to squeeze in some extra time for exercise. Going for a walk during the day just got easier.

2: PRO – Less stress and more self care

The amount of stress we are under due to working late, office politics and more is certainly mitigated while working from home. A less stressful work environment can create more productivity in less time. This means there is time for more self-care strategies during the work day and around the work day. Just think, you could be on a conference call while doing yoga!

3: CON – Structure and routine can become problematic

For many people the problems with routine and structure became something that wasn’t necessarily a positive thing. Because you don’t have to wake up early or worry about hygiene or even getting out of pajamas, your sense of worth can take a toll. Some people talk about how they roll out of bed and log on to work never changing their clothes or even showering. Our brain loves knowing what comes next and thrives on routine. Even the slightest change in our hygiene routines can often precipitate depressive thoughts and feelings.

The psychology behind COVID-19 vaccine lotteries

(Source: axios.com

Ivana Saric
Jun 21, 2021 


NBA season tickets. Scholarships. A chance at $5 million. The list of lotteries and raffles states are launching to drive up COVID-19 vaccination rates is growing, and some local officials are already reporting "encouraging" results.

Driving the news: The reason why, some psychologists and public health experts say, is that the allure of lotteries for many people is simply that the prospect of winning a great prize seems better than passing up the chance, regardless of the odds.

  • "When you buy a lottery ticket for Mega Millions, for example, you literally have a chance of becoming a multimillionaire. If you don't buy that ticket, you don't have that chance," Nathan Novemsky, a professor of marketing and psychology at Yale University, told Axios.

  • Novemsky noted that people have a hard time conceiving the odds of winning, and when the chances are so "incredibly low," many tend it overweight them.

Another reason incentives could work is that most prizes can be categorized as "fun stuff," Novemsky said.

  • In addition to college scholarships and million-dollar lotteries, states and local governments have offered beer, doughnuts, and even marijuana.

  • "All those things are very positive and emotional and a little hedonic," Novemsky said. 'They're not giving away blenders, toasters, and vacuum cleaners."

The big picture: Some states and local governments offering incentives are already reporting some successes.

  • Ohio, the first state to announce a "Vax-a-Million" campaign, saw a 94% increase in vaccinations among 16- to 17-year-olds, a 46% increase among 18- to 19-year-olds, and a 55% uptick among 20- to 40-year-olds the week following the initiative's announcement, Gov. Mike DeWine (R) said.

  • New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) said that the state's incentive programs have "pushed more New Yorkers to pull up their sleeve" and get vaccinated. Cuomo lifted most COVID restrictions last week after 70% of New York adults received at least one vaccine dose.

  • Los Angeles County's Department of Public Health told Axios that vaccination sites participating in the county's raffle for Lakers season passes and Hamilton tickets reported "between a 30%-50% increase in the number of people getting their first dose."

Yes, but: Public health experts say it's hard to know exactly what is motivating people to get the vaccine.

  • Merely announcing the lottery creates an "informational shock" that raises people's awareness of the vaccine, so it's difficult to "separate the monetary component from the information component," said Anupam Jena, an associate professor of health care policy at Harvard.

  • Timing is also key. Ohio's lottery announcement coincided with the state opening up vaccinations for young people, making it hard to determine whether the upticks in vaccinations were coincidence or genuinely caused by the lotteries, Jena added.

Some experts worry incentives could backfire and make people more skeptical of the vaccine.

  • "Someone who has a lot of distrust of the vaccine might think, 'They'd never offer money if this was a good thing,'" David Asch, executive director of the University of Pennsylvania's Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, told Forbes.

Still, if studies confirm the lotteries work, their uses could be expanded to other public health initiatives.

  • "[T]here is interest in trying to figure out how to get people to take their medications, how to get people to be adherent to lifestyle and diet behaviors," Jena told Axios. "If this actually is true, then it would make sense for us to try to do these things for things like the flu."

The bottom line: The efficacy of incentives likely depends on the underlying reason for why people waited to get vaccinated in the first place, Novemsky noted.

  • The lotteries will work best on people who simply "haven't bothered" to get vaccinated yet, where the potential prizes act as the extra incentive needed to push them "over the edge from inertia to acting," Novemsky said.

  • "If someone is hesitant or worried that it's going to have, for example, negative health effects, then no, the lottery is probably not going to change much."

Half of Americans fear they’ll never fully recover from COVID pandemic stress

(Source: studyfinds.org

JUNE 18, 2021
by Chris Melore

NEW YORK — Half of Americans say that the COVID-19 pandemic has been so stressful they worry they’ll never fully be able to de-stress, even after it’s all over.

A survey of 2,000 Americans finds stress levels have been so bad since 2020 that 25 percent would go as far as escaping to a cabin in the woods by themselves in order to get away from the daily stresses of life. Another 15 percent would need to be even more remote, choosing a desert island as their de-stressing sanctuary. Crucially, respondents add they’d have to be totally alone to truly be able to de-stress.

The study, conducted by OnePoll and commissioned by CBDistillery, also finds that for many, getting rid of stress is all about the finer things in life. In fact, 35 percent of respondents think a trip to a luxury resort would do the trick.


De-stressing still takes work

The average American feels they would need 10 days in their ideal location to completely de-stress. This is borne out by the numbers, too; 55 percent admit their current stress levels have left them feeling burnt out.

Researchers also discovered that stress has a major impact on personal relationships. Seven out of 10 Americans say they get upset or frustrated with someone in their household for no reason at least once a week. These spats aren’t surprising though, as 51 percent admit they find it difficult to de-stress because they live with others.

“Sometimes it’s the smallest things that can trigger stress,” says a spokesperson for CBDistillery in a statement. “Our results found 45 percent of respondents admitted their coping mechanisms for dealing with stress aren’t the healthiest – which can then create a cycle of stress, making these issues worse.”

With all of this in mind, it’s no wonder 46 percent say they’re desperate for a more effective way to handle stress. Nearly three in five respondents believe just having one extra hour of free time to do nothing every day would help their stress levels immensely.


Entertainment is the top coping mechanism for pandemic stress

In attempts to find their happy place and find peace, some of the top coping mechanisms Americans use include listening to music (45%), taking a walk (38%), binge-watching TV (33%), and exercising (29%). Other common coping mechanisms include cuddling with a pet, taking deep breaths (both 29%), eating a snack (28%), reading a book (26%), and playing video games (24%).

“It’s clear Americans are desperate to find a solution for their stress,” the spokesperson adds. “Whether it’s grabbing your favorite snack, taking a walk – there are so many things you can try until you find what works for you.”

The most recent dish... enjoy!

How the IRS is trying to nail crypto tax dodgers

(Source: cnbc.com )  PUBLISHED WED, JUL 14 2021, 12:08 PM EDT; UPDATED THU, JUL 15 2021 2:00 PM EDT MacKenzie Sigalos  @KENZIESIGALOS KEY PO...

Popular Dishes