বৃহস্পতিবার, ১ আগস্ট, ২০১৩

Philippines set to keep troops in Golan

AFP - The Philippines said Wednesday it would likely keep its 340 soldiers in the Golan Heights as part of a United Nations peacekeeping force, amid improved security for the troops.

Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario told reporters the UN was close to fulfilling three conditions on upgrading safety set by the Philippines that would allow the Filipino soldiers to stay beyond August 11.

"The conditions look fine to me," del Rosario said, adding he had recommended to President Benigno Aquino that they stay for at least another six-month mission.

"I still have to go back to the president for his blessing but I don't think it will be a problem."

The Philippines is one of the major contributors to the UN Golan force, which has been monitoring a ceasefire between Syria and Israel there since 1974.

Other countries have pulled out their contingents as violence from the Syrian civil war has spilt over into the area.

The Philippines said in May that it was considering withdrawing, after two groups of Filipino troops were briefly kidnapped by Syrian rebels in separate incidents.

Both groups were released unharmed, but the wounding of another Filipino soldier from shelling in June added to the security concerns.

Del Rosario said one of the three conditions set by the Philippines was that the total peacekeeping force return to its regular strength of 1,250 soldiers.

Another was extra military equipment for the soldiers, and the third was that the Philippines be able to review the mission every six months.

Del Rosario said he was confident the numbers in the peacekeeping force would climb to 1,250 by October.

Fiji has already emerged in recent months as a saviour for the peacekeeping force, agreeing to deploy 562 soldiers.

Del Rosario also said the UN had committed to the extra military equipment. And he said the Philippines was allowed to review its mission every six months, rather than annually, until at least 2015.

The Philippines was due either to extend its mission, or withdraw, on August 11.

Source: http://www.france24.com/en/20130731-philippines-set-keep-troops-golan

Freeh Report direct tv Savages Home Run Derby 2012 San Diego fireworks steve nash Malware Monday

Northern California man gets 42 years for Ponzi scheme

Attorney General Kamala Harris Monday announced a 42-year prison sentence for a Northern California man who ran a Ponzi scheme that defrauded more than 400 investors, most of them elderly, out of more than $90 million.

James Koenig, 60, of Redding, owned Assent Real Estate Corporation (AREI) from 1999 to 2008.

The company specialized in the acquisition, management and resale of commercial property and elder care facilities.

Most victims of his Ponzi scheme were elderly individuals from the Bay Area.

Koenig was found guilty in May of 35 felony counts, including conspiracy, use of a scheme to defraud in connection with sales of securities, sales of securities by means of false statements and residential burglary relating to the sales of fraudulent investments.

The jury also found special enhancements for great takings because of the large amount of loss involved.

This individual ran a ruthless Ponzi scheme that robbed investors, including vulnerable elderly people, of their life savings, said Attorney General Harris.

The 42-year prison sentence represents justice given the severity of this crime and the deep impact on victims.

I commend the work of the Department of Justice attorneys and support staff who worked on this complex case.

Koenig did not inform investors that he had a prior federal conviction for mail fraud, which prevented him from getting favorable loan terms for his company.

He also did not disclose AREI's dire financial condition. Many of the investors were elderly and placed their life savings or home equity into the securities offered by Koenig.

The company's early losses were managed by using the funds of new investors to pay off the original investors.

By 2007, AREI had accumulated $163 million in debt that was unsecured or significantly undersecured and required monthly payments of more than $1.8 million to maintain.

In April 2007, AREI stopped making payments to investors, while continuing to solicit and sell securities to new investors.

The Ponzi scheme finally failed in the spring of 2008.

The case was based on 32 of the more than 400 victims, whose losses exceeded $8 million $3.8 million of which came from investments made after April 2007 when AREI stopped paying its current investors.

At the time of sentencing, the total losses by victims were reported to be in excess of $90 million.

Koenig was sentenced in Shasta County Superior Court on Friday.

A restitution hearing will occur at a later date.

Source: http://www.redbluffdailynews.com/ci_23759080/northern-california-man-gets-42-years-ponzi-scheme?source=rss_viewed

derrick rose torn acl undrafted free agents braveheart roy orbison the third man 2012 nfl draft order mohamed sanu

বুধবার, ৩১ জুলাই, ২০১৩

Opus Virtual Offices' new summer promotion makes it easier than ...

(PR NewsChannel) / July 31, 2013 / BOCA RATON, Fla.?

With summer in full sOpus Virtual Officeswing, entrepreneurs and business owners have never had a better opportunity to enjoy the season with family and friends because, in the spirit of summer vacation, Opus Virtual Offices is waiving the set-up fee for new clients.

?Opus VO is the perfect solution for entrepreneurs who are looking for reliable staff to professionally represent their company while they enjoy some much needed time away,? said Yori Galel, the CEO of Opus Virtual Offices. ?By entering the promotion code SUMMER on our website, clients have never had an easier opportunity to obtain the office presence they deserve.?

Opus Virtual Offices allows clients the opportunity to have a complete office presence for a nominal fee of $99 per month.?

Virtual offices are equipped with a multitude of business center amenities such as conference rooms for face to face corporate or customer meetings, efficient,?live professional receptionists?taking calls and premium call forwarding for nights and weekends with a 24/7 voice mail to email system, insuring no missed messages.

Defining a virtual office as a complete business system that utilizes advanced technology to create a flexible online workplace, Opus VO eliminates the costs and hassles of renting physical space. Opus VO combines the best features of a low cost virtual office with a prestigious corporate address and enhanced business center facilities that is certain to provide a unique opportunity for businesses worldwide.

Including hundreds of impressive corporate addresses across the country, Opus VO is designed to extend a clients? freedom to extend their business to locations they never imagined possible. By using Opus Virtual Offices, businesses are able to not only reduce operating expenses, but also increase productivity and profits.

For further information visit?www.opusvirtualoffices.com

About Opus Virtual Offices:?Opus Virtual Offices provides the most complete Virtual Office program available in the industry, with more than 400 locations in the US, giving you the corporate image you require. The Virtual Office program is the perfect office solution for all new and expanding businesses looking to gain all the resources to provide the perfect image at a low cost. Our sophisticated system has been designed to provide all the features a professional business requires without having the extreme costs that are normally associated with the operating of a business.

MEDIA CONTACT
Florence Goodman
Phone:????????? (561) 988-6900
Website:????????www.opusvirtualoffices.com?

Direct link:??http://www.prnewschannel.com/2013/07/31/opus-virtual-offices-new-summer-promotion-makes-it-easier-than-ever-for-new-clients-to-establish-complete-office-presence/

SOURCE:??Opus Virtual Offices

This press release is distributed by PR NewsChannel. Your News. Everywhere.

Source: http://www.prnewschannel.com/2013/07/31/opus-virtual-offices-new-summer-promotion-makes-it-easier-than-ever-for-new-clients-to-establish-complete-office-presence/

ricky rubio day light savings time peter paul and mary edgar rice burroughs dallas clark litter marinol

At least two critically injured, 10 missing in large explosions at Florida propane plant

Tyler Mackenzie Photography

A series of explosions engulfed a propane plant in flames in Tavares, Florida, late Monday. This photo was taken at 11.36 p.m. from a location between 1-2 miles from the blast.

By M. Alex Johnson, Staff Writer, NBC News

A series of explosions engulfed a propane plant in flames in Tavares, Fla., late Monday, injuring at least seven people ? three of them critically ? and forcing evacuations for a half-mile around the scene, authorities said.

The explosions began as a fire spread through the Blue Rhino plant in Lake County,?near Orlando,?about 10:30 p.m. ET, Lake County sheriff's Lt. John Herrell told reporters early Tuesday. Seven people were taken to hospitals, two by helicopter, he said. All of them were in the plant when the fire started.

Watch live coverage on WESH-TV

Residents of the area told NBC station WESH of Orlando that flames from the explosions could be seen for several miles, but there were no reports of damage to the surrounding buildings. ?

WESH-TV

Flames from the Blue Rhino propane plant in Tavares, Fla., seen from the air Monday night.

"It sounds like bombs are going off," Norma Haygood, a nearby resident, told WESH.

No deaths were immediately reported, Herrell said. Three male victims were in critical condition, the Orlando Regional Medical Center, told NBC News.?

Two were airlifted, while a third was still being transported by ambulance at 3:00 a.m ET. ?

Authorities initially declared a one-mile evacuation zone around the plant, but they later scaled that back to a half-mile, effective until 6 a.m. ET.?

"We feel that there is no longer any danger" to the area around the plant, Herrell said.

Twenty-four or 26 people were scheduled to work the night shift at the 33,000-acre facility, according to plant managers, Herrell said. Authorities initially said 15 people were unaccounted for, but Herrell later said the company's management said that they had accounted for all of the people it knew were in the plant at the time of the initial explosion.

NBC News/Bing Maps

Some of them showed up at others location, according to Blue Rhino, Herrell said. He said he had no further information on where the others were.

The plant housed about 53,000 20-pound propane cylinders, Herrell said.

"They store the propane cylinders on different parts of the property, and as the fire spread, there were more and more explosions," he said.?

Explosions continued but were diminishing at 1 a.m. ET Tuesday, 2? hours after the first blasts were reported.

Don Ingram, former plant production supervisor at the plant, said his son felt one of the explosions in their home 6 miles away.

Ingram told WESH that the back area of the plant is "lined with propane tanks stacked four or five high on plastic pallets."

"I don't think you fight this fire," he said. "It's just too dangerous."

Blue Rhino is a subsidiary of Ferrellgas Partners, the second-largest distributor of propane in the U.S.

Azhar Fateh of NBC News contributed to this report.

This story was originally published on

Source: http://feeds.nbcnews.com/c/35002/f/663306/s/2f524005/sc/8/l/0Lusnews0Bnbcnews0N0C0Inews0C20A130C0A70C290C197637310Eat0Eleast0Etwo0Ecritically0Einjured0E10A0Emissing0Ein0Elarge0Eexplosions0Eat0Eflorida0Epropane0Eplant0Dlite/story01.htm

snooki pregnant gbc hedy lamarr kowloon walled city ronda rousey vs miesha tate lindsay lohan snl lindsay lohan on snl

Do We Really Need Car Dealerships Anymore?

Tesla Motors wants to change the way we power our cars. But first it wants to change the way we buy them.

This year Tesla has faced off against the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), a trade group that represents car retailers, over Tesla's right to sell cars through its websites and manufacturer-owned stores. Tesla calls them showrooms?a way, we presume, to circumvent existing laws regarding franchises. NADA is having none of it. It wants to protect the dealership system, and is even fighting in some states to ban Tesla from selling its own cars directly to customers. In scoring a number of court victories, Tesla has codified its right to circumvent state laws and keep a tight control over the retail experience for any potential customers of the Model S.

Visiting a car dealership is a miserable experience that probably ranks somewhere between an IRS audit and a colonoscopy on many people's activities' list. So Tesla's fight got us wondering: Is there any benefit from the current system, which grants dealers an exclusive retail monopoly on what's likely to be one of your largest purchases? Or is this just a case of the powers that be digging in to protect their interests?

The Locals

Almost every auto dealer is an independent franchise, because nearly ever state requires it to be that way. It's a business model that began as a way for automakers to spread their geographic reach quickly and with minimal corporate investment?the franchise owner assumes most of the financial risk. Along the way, states enacted laws designed to prevent corporate ownership of dealers, which prevents manufacturers from providing in-house stores with advantages not available to franchisees. Texas, for instance, bans direct-to-consumer sales, while rules can vary widely in other states.

"Most of the dealers have been doing this awhile," Dan Lacy, of Lacy Ford Lincoln Mercury Subaru, told PopMech, providing a humble spin on the fourth-generation, family-owned business that his great grandfather founded 99 years ago, making Lacy's store in Catskill, N.Y., the state's oldest Ford dealership. "We have stories from my mom and dad about how their first washer/dryer came from a car trade," he says. "There are even stories that my grandfather would take chickens in on trade."

Lacy's pitch for the dealership system boils down to this: We're a local business, and local business is good for the local economy. "Not only do these dealers employ local people, but they also spend money in the community," he says. "We do a lot of fund-raisers, support little leagues, football, basketball leagues." Moreover, Lacy employees are locals who live, shop, and spend money in the community. "I think being able to employ 50 people in today's economy is important," Lacy says.

Given Tesla's famously chary behavior when it comes to outsiders, it seems possible that the company would pick transplants who know Telsa up and down, rather than locals, to run new stores. In contrast, Lacy claims that growing up, living, and working in the community means the dealer knows what his customers want and expect. "We're brought up in the area, we know the area, and know how to sell cars here," he says.

To make his point, Lacy cited the Ford Retail Network?the blue oval brand's late-20th-century experiment in corporate-owned retail. Ford took over eight local stores not too far away in Rochester, N.Y., only to shutter them just three years later following conflicts with independent dealers, and resulting in a significant settlement with the New York State Attorney General's office over deceptive advertising practices. "When a big corporation comes in, sometimes what they think is best is not best," Lacy says. "I've seen it happen."

The Future

Diarmuid O'Connell, Tesla's vice president of business and corporate development, argues that this old-fashioned approach is an impediment in a radical business like selling EVs.

"There is a phase, after the early adopters, where you have to help people to compare and understand the benefits of electric drive versus gasoline power," O'Connell says. "We believe we're best suited to doing this because, in a traditional dealer environment, the bread and butter of an auto dealer is selling traditional technology."

The flip side of Lacy's local-business-is-good-business argument is the middleman effect: You pay more to buy a car from a local dealer. O'Connell cited "a Department of Justice study that found that 5 to 10 percent is added to the cost of a car because of the dealer system," and decried the idea that dealers exist "to protect customers."

O'Connell also says that having dealers sell Teslas alongside gasoline-powered cars would require the salespeople to "talk down their existing technology," which they would be disinclined to do, thus placing Teslas at a comparative disadvantage (though this logic might not fly with the American Chevy dealers who've moved more than 10,000 Volts so far this year from lots crowded with gas-powered cars, or the Nissan dealers who've sold a similar number of Leafs).

However, despite Tesla's current combative nature toward the established dealership system?and in what might be a disappointment to those hoping Tesla will disrupt the current car-buying experience?O'Connell tells PopMech that the EV-maker is not ruling out the possibility of establishing its own dealer network once the company grows large enough. "Elon and I have both said that there is a time when we will also want to sell our cars through franchise dealers," O'Connell says. "When we're selling a high-volume vehicle, hundreds of thousands a year, it's going to make a lot more sense to place 100 cars at once with a franchise dealer than to sell them one by one as we do right now."

And, he says, there's no reason Tesla dealers couldn't become community institutions just like any other car dealership. Tesla is already diving into some of these traditions: It sponsored a kids' baseball team in Palo Alto, Calif., and a Fourth of July parade in Florida. Last year Tesla even provided Santa with a whisper-quiet Model S to sled about in a Washington, D.C., holiday parade. "Why wouldn't we fund Little Leagues and YMCAs, as any business in the community would?" O'Connell says. "When we're in a community, it makes perfect sense. We're a business in that community."

We continue to appreciate Tesla's attempt to shake up the industry's accepted?and often outmoded?wisdom, almost as much as we look forward to seeing what kind of coffee and pastries are served at the brand's franchise in Peoria, Ill.

Source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/industry/do-we-really-need-car-dealerships-anymore-15748322?src=rss

Jabari Parker 2012 australia Brothers Grimm Tate Stevens Miss Universe 2012 x factor

Ask LH: Is It Legal To Park On The Wrong Side Of The Street ...

Hi Lifehacker, Is it legal to park a vehicle on the wrong side of the street? It?s customary to park your car so that its left side is closer to the kerb (since we drive on the left-hand side of the road), yet I see so many cars parked pointed the wrong way. I was once told that this was illegal since you have to drive on the wrong side of the road to park it, and then drive on the wrong side of the road again when you leave. Is that the case? Thanks, Nosey Parker

Tyre clamp picture from Shutterstock

Dear NP,

In all states and territories, drivers are required to park in the same direction as moving traffic when parked on the adjacent kerb (you can read an overview of NSW?s parallel parking rules here). This law exists for various reasons, ranging from the obstruction of your rear reflector lights at night to causing unnecessary confusion for other drivers.

As you note, it also indicates that the driver was driving on the wrong side of the road when they parked their car. Usually this is because they spotted a parking space on the opposite side of the road, or pulled out of a driveway in the wrong direction. Whatever the reason, it?s still illegal. The only exceptions we can think of are 45 degree parking spaces and areas with specific signage that grant permission.

If you park your car in this manner you?re liable to get a ticket from a parking inspector, or even the police if the positioning is deemed to be dangerous. That said, it?s pretty low down on the crime-busting stakes so people continue to do so without suffering any repercussions. If the situation bothers you and you think it could cause an accident, contact your local council and provide them with the relevant information: one fine is usually all it takes to make a driver follow the rules.

Cheers
Lifehacker

Got your own question you want to put to Lifehacker? Send it using our contact form.

Source: http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2013/07/ask-lh-is-it-legal-to-park-on-the-wrong-side-of-the-street/

the maldives harper lee mega millions numbers the fray seahawks new uniforms 2012 tornadoes in dallas kentucky basketball

মঙ্গলবার, ৩০ জুলাই, ২০১৩

On rooftops, a rival for utilities

energy

5 hours ago

Panels in the Deer Valley section of Phoenix. Utilities say the subsidies given to solar-minded homeowners are too generous.

Joshua Lott for The New York Times

Panels in the Deer Valley section of Phoenix. Utilities say the subsidies given to solar-minded homeowners are too generous.

For years, power companies have watched warily as solar panels have sprouted across the nation?s rooftops. Now, in almost panicked tones, they are fighting hard to slow the spread.

Alarmed by what they say has become an existential threat to their business, utility companies are moving to roll back government incentives aimed at promoting solar energy and other renewable sources of power. At stake, the companies say, is nothing less than the future of the American electricity industry.

According to the Energy Information Administration, rooftop solar electricity ? the economics of which often depend on government incentives and mandates ? accounts for less than a quarter of 1 percent of the nation?s power generation.

And yet, to hear executives tell it, such power sources could ultimately threaten traditional utilities? ability to maintain the nation?s grid.

?We did not get in front of this disruption,? Clark Gellings, a fellow at the Electric Power Research Institute, a nonprofit arm of the industry, said during a panel discussion at the annual utility convention last month. ?It may be too late.?

Advocates of renewable energy ? not least solar industry executives who stand to get rich from the transformation ? say such statements are wildly overblown. For now, they say, the government needs to help make the economics of renewable power work for ordinary Americans. Without incentives, the young industry might wither ? and with it, their own potential profits.

The battle is playing out among energy executives, lawmakers and regulators across the country.

In Arizona, for example, the country?s second-largest solar market, the state?s largest utility is pressuring the Arizona Corporation Commission, which sets utility rates, to reconsider a generous residential credit and impose new fees on customers, months after the agency eliminated a commercial solar incentive. In North Carolina, Duke Energy is pushing to institute a new set of charges for solar customers as well.

Nowhere, though, is the battle more heated than in California, home to the nation?s largest solar market and some of the most aggressive subsidies. The outcome has the potential to set the course for solar and other renewable energies for decades to come.

At the heart of the fight is a credit system called net metering, which pays residential and commercial customers for excess renewable energy they sell back to utilities. Currently, 43 states, the District of Columbia and four territories offer a form of the incentive, according to the Energy Department.

Some keep the credit in line with the wholesale prices that utilities pay large power producers, which can be a few cents a kilowatt-hour. But in California, those payments are among the most generous because they are tied to the daytime retail rates customers pay for electricity, which include utility costs for maintaining the grid.

California?s three major utilities estimate that by the time the subsidy program fills up under its current limits, they could have to make up almost $1.4 billion a year in revenue lost to solar customers, and shift that burden to roughly 7.6 million nonsolar customers ? an extra $185 a year if evenly spread. Some studies cited by solar advocates have shown, though, that the credit system can result in a net savings for the utilities.

Utilities in California have appealed to lawmakers and regulators to reduce the credits and limit the number of people who can participate. It has been an uphill fight.

About a year ago, the utilities pushed regulators to keep the amount of rooftop solar that would qualify for the net metering program at a low level; instead, regulators effectively raised it. Still, the utilities won a concession from the Legislature, which ordered the California Public Utilities Commission to conduct a study to determine the costs and benefits of rooftop solar to both customers and the power grid with an eye toward retooling the policy.

Edward Randolph, director of the commission?s energy division, said that the study, due in the fall, was a step toward figuring out how to make the economics work for customers who want to install solar systems as well as for the nonsolar customers and the utilities. The commission wants to ensure, he said, that, ?we aren?t creating a system that 15 years from now has the utility going, ?We don?t have customers anymore but we still have an obligation to provide a distribution system ? how do we do that?? ?

The struggle over the California incentives is only the most recent and visible dust-up as many utilities cling to their established business, and its centralized distribution of energy, until they can figure out a new way to make money. It is a question the Obama administration is grappling with as well as it promotes the integration of more renewable energy into the grid.

Utility executives have watched disruptive technologies cause businesses in other industries to founder ? just as cellphones upended the traditional land-based telephone business, producing many a management shake-up ? and they want to stay ahead of a fundamental shift in the way electricity is bought, sold and delivered.

?I see an opportunity for us to recreate ourselves, just like the telecommunications industry did,? Michael W. Yackira, chief executive of NV Energy, a Nevada utility, and chairman of the industry group the Edison Electric Institute, said at the group?s convention.

The fight in California has become increasingly public, with the two sides releasing reports and counter-reports. A group of fast-growing young companies that install rooftop systems, including SolarCity, Sungevity, Sunrun and Verengo, recently formed their own lobbying group, the Alliance for Solar Choice, to battle efforts to weaken the subsidies and credit systems.

They have good reason. In California, as intended, net metering has proved a strong draw for customers. From 2010 to 2012, the amount of solar installed each year has increased by 160 percent, almost doubling the amount of electricity that rooftop systems can make, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. With federal tax credits and a rebate program for installation costs under the California Solar Initiative phasing out, determining how much to pay customers has become even more critical.

?Net metering right now is the only way for customers to get value for their rooftop solar systems,? said Adam Browning, executive director of the advocacy group Vote Solar.

Mr. Browning and other proponents say that solar customers deserve fair payment not only for the electricity they transmit but for the value that smaller, more dispersed power generators give to utilities. Making more power closer to where it is used, advocates say, can reduce stress on the grid and make it more reliable, as well as save utilities from having to build and maintain more infrastructure and large, centralized generators.

But utility executives say that when solar customers no longer pay for electricity, they also stop paying for the grid, shifting those costs to other customers. Utilities generally make their profits by making investments in infrastructure and designing customer rates to earn that money back with a guaranteed return, set on average at about 10 percent.

?If the costs to maintain the grid are not being borne by some customers, then other customers have to bear a bigger and bigger portion,? said Steve Malnight, a vice president at Pacific Gas and Electric. ?As those costs get shifted, that leads to higher and higher rates for customers who don?t take advantage of solar.?

Utility executives call this a ?death spiral.? As utilities put a heavier burden on fewer customers, it increases the appeal for them to turn their roofs over to solar panels.

A handful of utilities have taken a different approach and are instead getting into the business of developing rooftop systems themselves. Dominion, for example, is running a pilot program in Virginia in which it leases roof space from commercial customers and installs its own panels to study the benefits of a decentralized generation.

Last month, Clean Power Finance, a San Francisco-based start-up that provides financial services and software to the rooftop solar industry, announced that it had backing from Duke Energy and other utilities, including Edison International. And in May, NextEra Energy Resources bought Smart Energy Capital, a commercial solar developer.

But those are exceptions.

?The next six to 12 months are the watershed moment for distributed energy in this country,? said Edward Fenster, a chief executive of Sunrun, adding that if their side prevailed in California and Arizona, it would dissuade utilities with net metering programs elsewhere from undoing them. ?If we don?t succeed, the opposite will be the case and in two years we?ll be fighting 41 of these battles.?

This story was originally published on July 29, 2013 in The New York Times under the headline, "On rooftops, a rival for utilities."

Copyright ? 2013 The New York Times

Source: http://feeds.nbcnews.com/c/35002/f/663286/s/2f4d8660/sc/31/l/0L0Snbcnews0N0Cbusiness0Crooftops0Erival0Eutilities0E6C10A784196/story01.htm

jason wu Mavericks Surf Stonewall Inaugural Ball julio jones j crew san francisco 49ers