tv Bloomberg Technology Bloomberg March 18, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm EDT
♪ emily: on emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg technology." coming up in the next half-hour is the biggest tech startup ipo three years in the largest ipo in the u.s. this year. we will talk about lyft's prospects. apple unexpectedly reveals a new ipad and ipad many. how does it fit into the overall
device strategy? u.s. officials are in the early stages of a probe into google focused on antitrust and privacy concerns and the largest coordinated effort to take on big tech since the 1990's. we will hear from the attorney general of texas, ken paxton. first, in the first big tech ipo of the year, lyft is hoping to raise nearly $2 billion. that would value the ride-hailer at nearly $20 billion. the company reported that lost $991 million in 2018 on just under $2 billion in revenue. price ons are set to march 28 and start trading on the nasdaq the next day. what new information do we have now that we know the pricing strategy? what we've about been talking about. for a while, the range was 18 to
30, then 20 to 25 billion. now it seems like the market cap could be just under $20 billion. the stock grants go to employees. that puts us somewhere $20 billion to $23 billion. it looks like we are looking at a lyft valuation between $20 billion and $25 billion like we've been talking about. to me, the excitement is seeing how retail investors and the public markets value a company that on the one hand has been able to sell revenue but on the other hand continues to lose hundreds of millions of dollars. emily: what have investors been saying since they learned that lyft is losing half as much money as it makes? eric: to some degree, it feels like, to now, we are sort of numb to losses.
it hasn't been a huge focus. uber have beend able to talk about contribution margins and sort of how they are continuing to improve margins over time. i looked at a video that lyft put together and they really talk about how they are making more on individual riders. losses andetween revenue. i think there are ways they are slicing it to make it more palatable. for risk factors, they have the palatable, we could never turn a profit. for lyft, it remains a big question mark. will: it looks like lyft beat uber to the public markets by at least several weeks. what does that mean? eric: lyft has a major incentive to move first.
center ofsort of the anyone interested in ride-hailing's attention. uber is a much bigger company. there are much more pieces to put together. they need to explain ownership stakes. there have been talks about autonomous investment. there's a lot for uber to do. will: all right, we continue to keep you posted every step of the way. apple has debuted a new mid tier ipad with a larger screen and introduced the first ipad many updates since 2015. this comes a week before they plan to roll out a new entertainment bundle to compete with netflix. mark, why these surprise announcements? mark: not entirely a surprise. we wrote earlier this year that these were coming.
they are doing it a week in advance of their big event. you would think they would want to hold all this until march 25 but it seems like they want to clear the deck and make all the attention around the netflix competitor and the magazine services. emily: how does it sit -- how does it fit into the broader strategy? a lot of people thought the ipad many was long gone. >> previously, we were basically looking at two distinct types of ipads. $300,ry-level ipad around but also the ipad pro model around $1700. now we are seeing the return of the ipad many and the ipad air. these are priced at $400 and $500. just wi-fi, no cellular. a little bit more expensive than the education only models.
these are basically refreshers to older lines. expensivero is quite for most people. people wanted the faster performance and the better screens and they are getting that with the 10.5 inch ipad air. a lot of people wanted to see the pro version of the ipad many and you're getting that to some extent today as well. bely: i think there will some parents out there who might be excited about the new ipad many. a vote of confidence on the ipad? we know sales have been falling year after year but that apple isn't going to be breaking out ipad sales. mark: what you are seeing is an expansion of the product lineup. there are so many different macs. we see apple now expand the product lineup into new shapes,
products, and sizes in a way they haven't done before. ipad, theyon of the are basically coming out and saying that the ipad is one complete product family as well, just like the mac. i think it is quite behind some of the software you are seeing from some of the other tablet makers. tell us more about what we are expecting out of this event on monday. it is not just an opportunity its content unveil strategy, but also a new subscription service. holding backally some articles from apple's news service. mark: i can tell you, the new imacs and imax -- and
won't be next week. apple is showcasing itself as a services company. been preservede for their highest profile products. new apple watches, new iphones, eight few other devices over the past few years. now they are putting services up there on par with their highest and hardware. is pretty much as important and this will showcase that. emily: all right, well you will be all over that event for us. thank you so much for stopping by. coming up, social media platforms like facebook rely heavily on algorithms to stop the spread of extremist content. as we saw in new zealand, that doesn't always work. we dig into why, next. if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio, the
bloomberg app, and on sirius xm in the u.s.. this is bloomberg. ♪
>> today, as we sit here, 97% -- 99% of the isis and al qaeda content we take down, systems flag it before a human sees it. proactively police and enforce safety across the community. emily: that right there is what mark zuckerberg told the senate judiciary committee in april of last year. this is what facebook newsroom tweeted the day after the new zealand mosque shootings that killed 50 people. "in the first 24 hours, we removed 1.5 million videos of the attack globally, of which
1.2 million were blocked at upload." to discuss, we have a professor of technology and digital business at the wharton school. he's also the author of a new book called "a human guide to machine learning: a look at how algorithms are shaping today." that means the video still made it on facebook's platform 300,000 times. is that worse than we thought? >> we knew it was bad, not just on facebook but on youtube and other platforms on social media and the internet. we know it is bad when this many violent,n see such gruesome imagery. when these companies struggle to use the tools at their disposal, that is a lot of use. as we saw over the weekend, those things are being
politicized. 27 longe know it took minutes for the video to be caught and taken down in the first place. why so many hundreds of thousands of times does it still make it through the algorithm one facebook clearly doesn't want it on its platform? kartik: they have taken a number of steps over the years. we have to understand that live videos are particularly problematic for these algorithms. most of these firms, including facebook, they have a three-pronged approach to catch this kind of content. first, they have created a large database of known offensive or extremist content. isn it is uploaded, it compared against that. live videos don't look like something they have seen before. emily: why have live video at all? there have been murders and suicides on the platform before. kartik: that is their business
that they are looking at. it has a lot of potential, opportunities. people are at a music concert, they can stream what is happening there. i can be streaming to my friends, hey, i'm on bloomberg. they have machine learning algorithms that look at this content and predict the likelihood that the content is offensive, but it is not an exact science. you have video of someone shooting. it could be terror-related. it could be someone at a shooting range. it could be someone uploading a video game. live video in particular is very hard. emily: facebook and youtube know it is a problem. is there any way to put the monster back in its cage now that this is a feature on the site? do you disable it? do you delay live video? tom: that is a question that has come up, do you delay. on live television, you don't see the terrible things that
happen, the wardrobe malfunctions, what have you, because there is this delay. practically speaking, when you have millions of people at any given moment putting live video see, and, i don't maybe you can explain how you can physically delay live video. it doesn't even become live video in that instance. "live" and call it you delay in a little bit. in the end, no algorithm will have 100% accuracy. human beings, users to flag offensive content. that takes a few minutes, eight few hours sometimes. one has to in some way deal with this. the real question is not why a video got through. i think it is unavoidable with live content. the question to me is what exactly are these firms doing to
police the content? can they be more transparent? this is something we are starting to see from initial steps. these platforms have taken down terrorist, isis related content, but not nearly the same efforts have been taken to eliminate white supremacy on these platforms. often you will hear, this is free speech, this didn't quite cross the line. what about this problem that white supremacy and hate online can often feed violent acts? kartik: it is a tough line between what is free speech and what is clearly promoting hate and needs to go away. for every decision they are taking, there will be somebody on the others. they have to take an aggressive action. they have to view themselves as a media company that has to take on the responsibility of
curating. we are a platform, we are letting users share what we want. tom: this goes back to something that mark zuckerberg has talked about from the beginning. he wants us to think of facebook as a technological company, not as a media company. once you start to consider yourself for be considered a media company, you become subject to the same rules and regulations that other media companies in the u.s. are subject to. that comes with the government intervening and putting limits on things like delays and what kind of content. the other thing to bear in mind really quickly is that facebook has gotten in trouble in the past when it is viewed as filtering out political content. sometimes right-leaning content that we may see as extreme, facebook would be very careful about saying, this can't be on our platform because the right will come back and say, look him a facebook was discriminated against the same way the left
see themwe started to taking down left-leaning content. emily: we will talk about that later on the show. hosanagar, thank you so much for stopping by. they are bringing a city-based model to e-sports next. check us out and be sure to follow our global breaking news network tictoc on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪
oneweb, fresh off launching its first batch of satellites, has secured another round of funding.
raised $1.25just billion, bringing its total investment to date to $3.4 billion. qualcomm and the rwandan government are among the investors. activision blizzard is bringing e-sports to a city near you. 2020, franchises will begin hosting matches in their home cities. much like nfl or nba teams, each franchise will have a home venue. the company's e-sports division -- continues to model itself after traditional sports organizations, hiring several veteran sports executives to its team.
bloomberg's scarlet fu sat down with the e-sports ceo at the sports summit to discuss. >> we are proud of the fact that we've been able to -- teambuilding moves, bringing in sports expertise into their e-sports businesses. we think about the ecosystem a lot. the fact that, to build a successful sports league, you need a lot of partners growing with you in the same direction. , media sponsors partners, licensees, players. there are all these constituents whose success matters a lot to us. that's the way sports works. when we set out to build that kind of ecosystem around our we want to do it with a team we have done with before. >> you are taking best practices
from different sports and putting it into this league. what do you have to start over from scratch? what do you have to come up with on your own? thatll, the advantages e-sports leagues have with respect to traditional sports are that e-sports is young, global, and digital native. areitional sports leagues looking for ways to become younger, more global, more digital native. we start there. thatbrings challenges traditional sports executives may not have dealt with how do way thatnt a game in a will capture and hold the attention of a 20-year-old fan as opposed to a 50-year-old fan? how do you present a broadcast real time in a dozen languages? how do you create a viewing
experience around the broadcast that matches the expectation that young people have for the kind of engagement and interaction with the stream that they are used to. those are challenges that i don't think sports executives really have about the top of their agenda. there is a bit of a learning curve for new execs coming in with sports. midhe league launched in february. you franchises. what did you learn so far about what works and perhaps what doesn't work? >> the big bet we made with the overwatch league is that we can unlock fans through the city-based model. it was the first city-based e-sports league and also the first permanent franchise e-sports league. we felt, if we found the right owners in the right markets, we could give people all over the world the reason to pay
attention to this league that they wouldn't have had in the old e-sports model which was not rooted in any geography. but we have learned is that even though we are not in those home markets yet, next year will be the first year actually playing home matches in home markets. the first few years, we've been playing all of our regular season in los angeles. despite that, there already large groups of fans springing up in these cities to support the teams. we see them self organizing around viewing parties. are showing people up. it has been a surprise that this happened as quickly as it has. we still have a long way to go. to get these teams to a are hostingthey really fun events in their
market. fromare all going to learn each other and it will take a long time to figure out what the model is. >> you also have a call of duty league. how will that be different from the overwatch league? >> the game is different. unlike with the overwatch league where we were starting from scratch, here there is an existing ecosystem of fans, sponsors, owners. that --to work within within those constraints for something that satisfies the core but creates an amount of upside for casual fans who aren't watching today. scarlet fumberg's with the activision blizzard e-sports ceo. coming up, looking closely at whether google presents an antitrust case.
our attorney with texas -- our interview with texas attorney general ken paxton is next. plus, trying to create a seamless workflow for its users. competing with apple, google, and microsoft. this is bloomberg. ♪
emily: this is bloomberg technology. last september, then u.s. attorney general jeff sessions called a meeting of state attorneys general to discuss whether google and facebook were suppressing conservative views. we know a smaller group of the state officials have been looking into possible antitrust consumer protection violations by google. this comes at a time where presidential hopefuls are calling for a breakup of big tech firms. a rallying cry that is reach across the aisle from the likes of texas senator ted cruz who retweeted senator warren's criticisms of facebook, adding "she is right.
big tech has way too much power to silence free speech. they should not be censoring warren or anyone else." that was after facebook took down some campaign ad s for warren. i want about this more, to get to texas attorney general ken paxton who is standing by. thank you so much for joining us. i have to start off with -- are you in texas part of this group of attorneys general that is looking into whether google presents an antitrust case? mr. paxton: we absolutely are. we have serious concerns about those issues. antitrust, the power and wealth of these companies. we have a history in this country at looking at these issues. we also have concerns about privacy. the lack of transparency and how they collect this information, the lack of
transparency on either use the information.consumers are being not being paid and there are children getting their data gathered and we have no protection for them. did not have a response to this probe, if you will, or early stages of a probe saying they will continue to engage constructively with states attorneys general on policy issues. what kind of action do you think needs to be taken against google? mr. paxton: we need to get more information from them. a lot of the questions answered were very general answers about analytics. there was a not a lot of clarity for state attorneys general to understand what they are dealing with. i've heard google has literally thousands and thousands of data points on every consumer that uses them. and knows more about you than you do. it is a little concerning that most consumers are not aware of
the massive data that these companies have. then, how they are using it and selling it. the consumer is not getting any of that money. aware i am sure you are of senator elizabeth warren's proposal to break up big tech at this point. this is what she had to say at sxsw a week and a half ago without her proposal. sen. warren: the opportunity to do what you do best, to come up with a great idea, to work your heart out to make it happen. to be able to compete on a level playing field is taken away by these platform giants. my view is break those things apart and we will have a much more competitive, robust market in america. emily: you've got republicans on your side of the aisle like ted cruz agreeing with her, at least in principle. do you think big tech needs to be broken up? mr. paxton: i am not sure yet, but i have concerns. i have talked to a lot of their
competitors that are being pushed out of the marketplace and they have no choice in how they respond because there is such controlled by a company like google that controls about 89% of the searches. it does put these smaller companies -- the either get purchased or pushed out of the marketplace. there are concerns about competitiveness and companies being able to start up and compete. emily: republicans generally resist the government getting involved. what makes this situation different? mr. paxton: we definitely tend to be free market. competition is the keyword. when you have companies dominate the marketplace, then competition goes away and you have this argument that consumers may be hard. med. the european union has already fined billions of dollars in different cases. there are concerns about the cod opportunity to create products that google
does not put out. emily: how do you feel given your concerns about data? how do you feel about facebook specifically and would you be interested in taking on a similar exploration on whether facebook deserves scrutiny as well? mr. paxton: we are looking at companies like facebook and google. it is not just limited to those companies. it is any of these giant companies that are dominating the marketplace and potentially harming consumers and causing consumers to be in a position where all of this data is controlled by one company, two companies or three companies and the consumer does not have access to it, they don't get paid for it and don't know how it is being used. emily: do you think consumers should get paid for their data? mr. paxton: i think that should be looked at. this is incredibly valuable information when you know so much about every consumer and you are selling that data and the consumer does not even know. there ought to be at least some greater transparency involved.
the consumer realizes what they are turning over to these companies. emily: if you are looking at google and facebook and other big tech companies, is it fair to say you are looking at amazon and apple and microsoft? mr. paxton: we are just beginning. we don't necessarily have specific companies we have targeted, but we're looking at a broad range of companies that control a lot of the marketplace. trying to determine are they involved in viewpoint discrimination? are they protecting consumer data? how do we get more transparency in the process so consumers are treated fairly and their information is protected? we don't know how much these companies are protecting the consumer data. emily: last year, we reported this exploration of google came out of this meeting with then attorney general jeff sessions out of concern these tech companies were suppressing conservative views. were you at that meeting with then attorney general sessions? mr. paxton: i could not attend. we are concerned about this.
this happened this week in the texas senate. the texas senate caucus put up a facebook post about a born alive bill to protect children that are being aborted after they are alive. that content was taken down by facebook. they were arguing that was engagement. they also took done another facebook post by an individual senator that talked about that issue. i don't know what engagement is. i thought free speech is what they wanted, but that is certainly in issue that is coming up more and more often. emily: do you believe this is deliberate or inadvertent by facebook? mr. paxton: it is hard to know because it seems relatively planned. they don't seem hav to have gret answers why this post versus another post and why that is engagement bait. hundreds like it are not engagement bait. they always claim they have some analytics or algorithm, but we can never ge seem to get what
that algorithm is doing. emily: there is concerned about the video of the mass shooting that was uploaded onto facebook and shared on facebook hundreds of thousands of times. facebook was unable to stop it 300,000 times from being posted. what role do you think the state should have in these issues? mr. paxton: we are talking first amendment. free speech is dangerous. it allows people to talk about all kinds of things we might not like personally, but i think free speech ought to be very broad and very protected. it is something the founders listed first. religious expression being something else that was protected. i think we have to be very careful at obviously government limiting speech, but if businesses are going to limit speech, they have to be transparent about what they are doing. they need not to falsely advertise that this is free speech when they are controlling content. emily: all right, lots of issues
to discuss. texas attorney general ken paxton, thank you so much for joining us. we will follow your actions and see what happens. meantime, president trump took to twitter over the weekend to criticize google specifically, saying google is helping china and their military, but not the u.s. the good news is they helped crooked hillary clinton and not trump. how did that turn out? in a statement, a spokesperson for the tech giant said we are not working with the chinese military. we are working with the u.s. government, including the department of defense in many areas including cybersecurity, recruiting and health care. coming up, dropbox adding new tools and integration to reprove workflow for millions of users. how the company is competing with the likes of apple, google and microsoft, next. this is bloomberg. ♪
emily: time now for the work shifted series when he took a look at how businesses are leveraging tech to improve the workplace. one company expanding individual workspace is dropbox. best known for its cloud storage, dropbox is working on his third-party integration to offer tools like electronic signature. this as a growth partnerships with big tech companies like google, salesforce, which also
happen to be its biggest competitors. joining us is the dropbox vice president of products, adam nash. how do you work with and compete with the likes of these gigantic companies on a daily basis? adam: well, thanks for having me. you know, i think in technology, the best solution is always follow the customer. it turns out work is changing for most people. we use more and more applications, devices. our teams vary. it turns out a lot of people touch all of these services. even when technologies compete on some fronts, if you are focused on the customer, you have to focus on making everything worked together. this has been one of the strong areas for dropbox. everything comes together with content. emily: you are talking about the work landscape and dropbox is part of that shift. what trends will we see in workplace productivity and collaboration? adam: two trends have been
rolling through the workplace for some time, but this year, they will become critically important for most organizations. the first is that most people realize work is being done in teams and those teams are becoming more varied. we work on with on one project is different than another. some cases, you are working with people outside the company. having tools and services that naturally connect across all those different boundaries is really important. emily: tell us about the tools you are offering. you just bought a company, a digital signing contract company. adam: that is a great example. i think that space, digital signature, is one of those areas and workflows that starts with content. documents created constantly. dropbox is a platform for huge of numbers of people have trusted with an incredible amount of content. making that workflow work between the creators, people running the process, people signing -- many outside the company -- it is one of those
places where dropbox thinks it could have a lot of volume. emily: cybersecurity has been a big issue. we have seen these massive tech thefts. what are you doing to make sure that does not happen to dropbox, given the incredible amount of personal information that you have on your users? adam: it is something that is incredibly important to the company. dropbox's scale really is surprising to most people. over half a billion
content. dropbox is built on the trust that our users, both individuals and the workplace, put into dropbox to protect the information. we pride ourselves on having world-class infrastructure, security system, technology and always pushing the front edge of that. many times collaborating with our peers and making sure we deal with threats as quickly as possible. emily: there has been a ton of consolidation in enterprise software. do you imagine that dropbox will continue to be an independent company? adam: i'm relatively new to the company, but i have to tell you there is a lot of excitement within the walls of dropbox about the potential for this platform. if you look at what is going on right now, content is really becoming king. more deliverables are the content people produce. share and collaborate around. as more and more collaboration happens online, we are seeing dropbox as more of a platform where all of these different platforms come together. whether you are using microsoft office, suite, the latest art of, all of that comes around the latest startup in dropbox. a more a role to play in enlightened way to work with less distraction, less noise and more focus on the work. we see that is a really high potential path. we still see the very early
days of what dropbox is building. emily: adam nash, good to have you back on the show. warner bros. ceo is the latest hollywood mogul to be toppled by scandal. he's leaving the studio over allegations he had a sexual relationship with an actress he helped promote. . at&t warner media says he brought risks to the company. "kevin acknowledges his mistake is inconsistent with the leadership expectations, including the company's ability to execute going forward." still ahead, this week in san francisco, members of the video gaming industry gathering for the annual game developer conference. what is trending this year? we will tell you next. this is bloomberg. ♪
emily: a new study has found most of amazon's private-label products are duds. the study looked at 23,000 products and found shoppers are more inclined to buy the brands, even when the company elevates them. more than 12,000 members of the videogame industry will gather at the annual game developers conference.
google is set to unveil a service that will allow people to play fortnite and other modern titles on a web browser or television using inexpensive hardware. this is the might herald the biggest shift in the global gaming market since super mario jumped arcade to the living room. joining us to discuss, the ceo of unity technology and former electronic arts ceo. good to have you back on the show, john. you're obviously a veteran in this business and have been around the block a few times. you are giving a keynote at gdc. what trends do you think we will see emerge this year? john: people will talk a lot about streaming and how that can change the living room for people. the netflix the video games from a number of big companies. i think we talk about rage racing, a new technology for
rendering something. it can look absolutely real. we will show a demo tonight where we will challenge the audience to tell the difference between, there was no car there and we just drew it, technology versus live video. it is virtually indistinguishable now. i think digital humans is going to be interesting. again, we will show a demo tonight where we will show a human interacting in a very complex, science fiction environment, and he looks absolutely human. again, this guy does not live, he has never been anywhere. the possibility of recasting your favorite actor from days of wayne, wear-old john can do that. ingt is actually push the boundary. open platform, closed platform. i think that will play itself
out. emily: what do you think of google's new netflix of gaming strategy given they are not making the content themselves? john: one i', i'm under nda. secondly, they happen event tomorrow. with all due respect to the many lawyers that back me up, i will stick with that for now. i think with streaming, it is definitely a part of the future. i don't think hardware under your tv is going anywhere anytime soon, but i also think that google is an amazing technology company. i know they put their heart and soul into what they are announcing tomorrow and i expect big things. emily: the gaming industry is grappling with big issues -- violence, lack of diversity, addiction. unity is in a unique position because your platform powers 50% of mobile games. what are some things you can do to help the gaming industry deal with these issues right through the actual development? john: we can unpack that
question over the next two hours. emily: it is a big question. john: i will start by saying unity powers about half of the world's games across all platforms. it is a great vantage point. i start by saying one of the things that has plagued the industry is a lack of diversity, inclusion. you wrote the book on this sort of thing. it motivated me. we are doing more at unity to support diversity and inclusion than most anyplace i'm aware of. one of the things to ensure you get the right outcome is to have the right input. it we have a diverse and inclusive environment, i think the work our company does will be better and we can have a really big influence over the rest of the industry. one is you can do the right thing by being the right team and i think we can influence the industry. in terms of violence in video games and that type of thing, parents, did many
my best to make sure my kids saw the right kind of content when they were ready for it emotionally. i also chaired the esa and read all of the studies. i don't think there is a correlation between violent video games and actual violence than there is if you watch hamlet with a half-dozen dead bodies on stage. i don't think i ever left the theater and whacked anybody over the head. emily: you did not shoot those actors yourself though. john: no, i don't think the connection -- the connection has been research many times and i don't think it is there. emily: a.r. and v.r., when will they finally go mainstream and will they? john: i think they both will be mainstream. they will both be mainstream within about 24 months, 36 months. some great companies -- facebook and oculus, hololens and
microsoft, vive and other really cool -- we support them all. what they have brought out so far is expensive and there is not a lot of content for it. they are in their early stages, not only ready for mainstream, but it takes a while to get these things set up. that changes in the next 24 months. emily: fortnite, will it be another flash in the pan or a lasting gaming phenomenon? john: there is always the next l asting gaming phenomenon to be replaced. the top 25 intellectual properties in the world are all games with revenues over $1 billion a year. this is a real industry now. whether it is fortnite or whatever, they will all be there. emily: john, thank you so much for stopping by. that does it for this edition of the show. we are as always livestreaming on twitter @technology.
follow our global breaking news network, tictoc, on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪
comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers. "activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast.
>> welcome to daybreak australia. shery: i'm shery ahn in new york. sophie: i'm sophie kamaruddin in hong kong. we are counting down to asia's major market open. paul: here are the top stories we are covering in the next hour. theresa may's new brexit blues. sterling falls as the speaker refuses a new vote. oil hits its highest of the year as opec plus agrees to stick with curbs.
Bloomberg March 18, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm EDT
Highlighting innovation, technology, media and the future of business.
Emily 28, Google 18, Us 11, Mr. Paxton 10, Bloomberg 9, Texas 8, John 8, U.s. 7, Adam 5, Ken Paxton 4, Microsoft 4, Warren 3, Kartik 3, Eric 2, San Francisco 2, Activision 2, New Zealand 2, Adam Nash 2, Netflix 2, Isis 2
Uploaded by TV Archive on March 18, 2019


Skip to main content View sitemap
Log in to cams
(CFI Awards Management System)
The Canada Foundation for Innovation Awards Management System (CAMS) is the secure online portal that allows universities, colleges, research hospitals and non-profit research institutions to apply for CFI funding and assists them in managing the full life cycle of a CFI-funded project.
If you notice any issues with CAMS, please inform the CFI at help.aide [at] innovation.ca.
Forgot password? Create a new account
Innovation.ca
Supporting the next generation
Fostering Commercialization
Paving the way for a digital future
Supporting Arctic and marine research
Apply & manage awards
Policy and program guide and supplemental information
John R. Evans Leaders Fund
College-Industry Innovation Fund
Major Science Initiatives Fund
Cyberinfrastructure Initiative
Exceptional Opportunities Fund
Past funding competitions
Manage awards
Infrastructure Operating Fund
Sharing good practices
Results & impacts
Assessing risk & performance
Framework & evaluations
Assessing value
Reporting on results
Assessing research capacity
Analyzing outcomes and impacts
Members and Board of Directors
Annual & corporate reports
Briefs to the House of Commons and Senate Committees
Annual Public Meetings
Working at the CFI
Address and directory
CAMS Login
'Search form'
Investing in state-of-the-art infrastructure that enables world-class research
Supporting Arctic and ocean science
View all multimedia
Our origin story
Research builds our communities
National research facilities
List of funded projects
Summary of funded projects
Picture-perfect therapy
An academic and industry partnership transforms the treatment of stroke
By Laura Eggertson
Ask Gene Saragnese, Vice-President of GE Healthcare, to describe the importance of his collaboration with Canadian researcher Ting-Yim Lee and he’ll sum it up in one word: “breakthrough.”
That’s because the technology that Lee pioneered, and then licensed to GE Healthcare, led to what Saragnese calls a “breakthrough application” for the treatment of stroke. Without this public-private partnership, physicians—and patients—would not have a sensitive imaging tool that helps immensely in the treatment of stroke.
Lee pioneered CT Perfusion—a type of diagnostic imaging that measures brain blood flow. Reading the imaging scans produced by CT Perfusion allows neuroradiologists and other physicians to tailor their treatment of stroke victims based on how much damage a stroke has caused to the brain. With this knowledge, physicians can see exactly what areas of the brain remain viable, and then administer medication that can relieve stroke symptoms.
Lee, a professor at The University of Western Ontario and a researcher at the Lawson Health Research Institute, the research arm of London Health Sciences Centre and St. Joseph's Health Care, and Robarts Research Institute in London, Ontario, developed the algorithms, the code, and ultimately the software that enables hospitals to perform perfusion scans using standard computed tomography (CT) imaging equipment. To date, about 3,500 hospitals around the world have bought licences to use Lee’s technology through the partnership with GE Healthcare, leading to a huge advance in stroke treatment.
“We’ve taken his work and incorporated it into our products and made them available to health care institutions around the world,” says Saragnese. In fact, the partnership between Lee’s research and GE Healthcare has been the key to making the research valuable beyond academia and applicable in hospitals. “We like to think that what we bring to the relationship is an outlet for the technology. You’re only relevant if you can get yourself into the industry and have an impact on the general population,” he says.
CT Perfusion, which has been a commercial success for GE, the university, and its affiliated research institutes is just one example from a group of spin-off companies and intellectual property applications that the university’s imaging specialists have created.
Under the leadership of Frank Prato, leader of the Lawson Health Research Institute’s imaging program, researchers have spun off four separate companies:
MultiMagnetics Incorporated develops research protocols, hardware, and software to support veterinary imaging and services. The company is also developing support equipment, software, and protocols for neonatal imaging, particularly of premature infants. President Terry Thompson is a researcher at Lawson.
Thames Valley Veterinary Services is a clinic Lawson set up to enable researchers to look at spontaneously occurring tumors in older female dogs. It also serves as a model for studying breast cancer tumors in humans. In addition to research studies, the clinic also provides MRI and CT services for veterinarians, and bone scans and iodine therapies for cats with thyroid problems.
Fralex Therapeutics is a company that Prato and his then-graduate student, Alex Thomas, co-founded in 1998 to develop neuromodulation technology, a therapy to alleviate chronic pain. The cell phone-sized technology, complete with altered headphones, works by disrupting pain signals in the brain.
Matheson Boulevard Veterinary Services is a veterinary clinic based in Mississauga that uses MultiMagnetics’ imaging protocols and works closely with Thames Valley Veterinary Services. It was founded by professionals trained at Lawson.
One of the major advantages of these companies, says Prato, is their ability to retain highly qualified people and to help bridge the gap between research grants and salaries for the experts who are now making London a world-renowned centre of excellence in imaging technologies and techniques.
The ability of Ting-Yim Lee’s CT Perfusion technology to provide clear images of blood flow and blood volume in the human brain helped his lab convince GE Healthcare that their technology could be applied to new markets. The Wisconsin-based company has since set up a plant in London to manufacture small animal CT scanners. The high-tech facility employs more than 30 people. The location of the plant purposefully takes advantage of the research Lee and his colleagues are conducting.
What’s more, Lee’s relationship with GE was one of the important factors in determining the location of the plant. “The London plant wouldn’t have come about if we didn’t have this kind of track record,” says Lee. “We now have a very close working relationship with GE. Once you have established a track record, it becomes much easier to get further research projects from them.”
The CT Perfusion technology also generated another major benefit—more than $8 million in licensing fees for research at the university and its affiliated institutes. About $2.3 million of that money was used to purchase the first combination Positron Emission Tomography (PET) CT scanner in Canada, as well as new small animal imaging equipment to strengthen the Molecular Imaging Program at the Lawson Health Research Institute. “It’s paid for itself very quickly,” says Prato.
The health benefits of Lee’s technology are also far-reaching. Because strokes are caused by blood clots blocking blood vessels in the brain, the most common treatment today is to administer a drug called TPA (tissue plasminogen activator) to destroy the clot. For TPA to be effective, it has to be administered within a three to six-hour window after the onset of the stroke symptoms. But since strokes often strike during sleep, and many stroke victims are elderly, it’s hard for physicians to know when a stroke has occurred.
CT Perfusion software can tell a neuroradiologist or stroke neurologist which parts of a patient’s brain are still functioning, and whether it’s safe or worthwhile to give TPA to a patient.
In the medical devices industry, collaboration among engineers and clinicians or researchers is crucial. It’s particularly important in the field of imaging, which is technologically based but grounded in clinical research. Although engineers understand the technology they can apply to problem-solve, it’s the clinicians and researchers who first determine and tell the engineers what the problems are.
“The interaction between the engineers, who know what’s possible, and the clinicians, who know what’s needed, has resulted in every major breakthrough that I know of in imaging to date,” says Vice-President and General Manager of GE Healthcare, Gene Saragnese, who is based in Waukesha, Wisconsin. For example, Lee’s knowledge of the importance of blood flow measurement to help clinicians treat stroke patients was essential to helping him create software sensitive enough to provide clear images of the brain.
Bone weary
New-age sports camp
Research builds communities
Research supported by the Canada Foundation for Innovation is helping build communities across Canada. That’s because the CFI gives researchers the tools they need to think big and innovate. And a robust innovation system translates into jobs and new enterprises, better health, cleaner environments and, ultimately, vibrant communities. By investing in state-of-the-art facilities and equipment in Canada’s universities, colleges, research hospitals and non-profit research institutions, the CFI also helps to attract and retain the world’s top talent, to train the next generation of researchers and to support world-class research that strengthens the economy and improves the quality of life for all Canadians.
Receive updates from the CFI
Access to Information & Privacy acts
© CFI 2019


« The Incoherence and Bad Faith of Antonin Scalia’s Originalism — Updated
Roger Farmer’s Prosperity for All »
A Tutorial for Judy Shelton on the ABCs of Currency Manipulation
Published February 15, 2017	currency manipulation , exchange rate protection , Judy Shelton 13 Comments
Tags: Max Corden
Currency manipulation has become a favorite bugbear of critics of both monetary policy and trade policy. Some claim that countries depress their exchange rates to give their exporters an unfair advantage in foreign markets and to insulate their domestic producers from foreign competition. Others claim that using monetary policy as a way to stimulate aggregate demand is necessarily a form of currency manipulation, because monetary expansion causes the currency whose supply is being expanded to depreciate against other currencies, making monetary expansion, ipso facto, a form of currency manipulation.
As I have already explained in a number of posts (e.g., here, here, and here) a theoretically respectable case can be made for the possibility that currency manipulation can be used as a form of covert protectionism without imposing either tariffs, quotas or obviously protectionist measures to favor the producers of one country against their foreign competitors. All of this was explained by the eminent international trade theorist Max Corden over 30 years ago in a famous paper (“Exchange Rate Protection”). But to be able to make a credible case that currency manipulation is being practiced, it has to be shown that currency depreciation has been coupled with a restrictive monetary policy – either by reducing the supply of, or by increasing the demand for, base money. The charge that monetary expansion is ever a form of currency manipulation is therefore suspect on its face, and those who make accusations that countries are engaging in currency manipulation rarely bother to support the charge with evidence that currency deprection is being coupled with a restrictive monetary policy.
So it was no surprise to see in Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal that monetary-policy entrepreneur Dr. Judy Shelton has written another one of her screeds promoting the gold standard, in which, showing no awareness of the necessary conditions for currency manipulation, she assures us that a) currency manipulation is a real problem and b) that restoring the gold standard would solve it.
Certainly the rules regarding international exchange-rate arrangements are not working. Monetary integrity was the key to making Bretton Woods institutions work when they were created after World War II to prevent future breakdowns in world order due to trade. The international monetary system, devised in 1944, was based on fixed exchange rates linked to a gold-convertible dollar.
No such system exists today. And no real leader can aspire to champion both the logic and the morality of free trade without confronting the practice that undermines both: currency manipulation.
Ahem, pray tell, which rules relating to exchange-rate arrangements does Dr. Shelton believe are not working? She doesn’t cite any. And, what, on earth does “monetary integrity” even mean, and what does that high-minded, but totally amorphous, concept have to do with the rules of exchange-rate arrangements that aren’t working?
Dr. Shelton mentions “monetary integrity” in the context of the Bretton Woods system, a system based — well, sort of — on fixed exchange rates, forgetting – or choosing not — to acknowledge that, under the Bretton Woods system, exchange rates were also unilaterally adjustable by participating countries. Not only were they adjustable, but currency devaluations were implemented on numerous occasions as a strategy for export promotion, the most notorious example being Britain’s 30% devaluation of sterling in 1949, just five years after the Bretton Woods agreement had been signed. Indeed, many other countries, including West Germany, Italy, and Japan, also had chronically undervalued currencies under the Bretton Woods system, as did France after it rejoined the gold standard in 1926 at a devalued rate deliberately chosen to ensure that its export industries would enjoy a competitive advantage.
The key point to keep in mind is that for a country to gain a competitive advantage by lowering its exchange rate, it has to prevent the automatic tendency of international price arbitrage and corresponding flows of money to eliminate competitive advantages arising from movements in exchange rates. If a depreciated exchange rate gives rise to an export surplus, a corresponding inflow of foreign funds to finance the export surplus will eventually either drive the exchange rate back toward its old level, thereby reducing or eliminating the initial depreciation, or, if the lower rate is maintained, the cash inflow will accumulate in reserve holdings of the central bank. Unless the central bank is willing to accept a continuing accumulation of foreign-exchange reserves, the increased domestic demand and monetary expansion associated with the export surplus will lead to a corresponding rise in domestic prices, wages and incomes, thereby reducing or eliminating the competitive advantage created by the depressed exchange rate. Thus, unless the central bank is willing to accumulate foreign-exchange reserves without limit, or can create an increased demand by private banks and the public to hold additional cash, thereby creating a chronic excess demand for money that can be satisfied only by a continuing export surplus, a permanently reduced foreign-exchange rate creates only a transitory competitive advantage.
I don’t say that currency manipulation is not possible. It is not only possible, but we know that currency manipulation has been practiced. But currency manipulation can occur under a fixed-exchange rate regime as well as under flexible exchange-rate regimes, as demonstrated by the conduct of the Bank of France from 1926 to 1935 while it was operating under a gold standard. And the most egregious recent example of currency manipulation was undertaken by the Chinese central bank when it effectively pegged the yuan to the dollar at a fixed rate. Keeping its exchange rate fixed against the dollar was precisely the offense that the currency-manipulation police accused the Chinese of committing.
When governments manipulate exchange rates to affect currency markets, they undermine the honest efforts of countries that wish to compete fairly in the global marketplace. Supply and demand are distorted by artificial prices conveyed through contrived exchange rates. Businesses fail as legitimately earned profits become currency losses.
It is no wonder that appeals to free trade prompt cynicism among those who realize the game is rigged against them. Opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership in June 2015, Rep. Debbie Dingell (D., Mich.) explained: “We can compete with anybody in the world. We build the best product. But we can’t compete with the Bank of Japan or the Japanese government.”
In other words, central banks provide useful cover for currency manipulation. Japan’s answer to the charge that it manipulates its currency for trade purposes is that movements in the exchange rate are driven by monetary policy aimed at domestic inflation and employment objectives. But there’s no denying that one of the primary “arrows” of Japan’s economic strategy under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, starting in late 2012, was to use radical quantitative easing to boost the “competitiveness” of Japan’s exports. Over the next three years, the yen fell against the U.S. dollar by some 40%.
That sounds horrible, but Dr. Shelton conveniently forgets – or declines – to acknowledge that in September 2012, the yen had reached its post-war high against the dollar. Moreover, between September 2012 and September 2015, the trade weighted US dollar index in terms of major currencies rose by almost 25%, so most of the depreciation of the yen against the dollar reflected dollar appreciation rather than yen depreciation.
Now as I pointed out in a post in 2013 about Japan, there really were reasons to suspect that the Japanese were engaging in currency manipulation even though Japan’s rapid accumulation of foreign exchange reserves that began in 2009 came to a halt in 2012 before the Bank of Japan launched its quantitative easing program. I have not kept up on what policies the Bank of Japan has been following, so I am not going to venture an opinion about whether Japan is or is not a currency manipulator. But the evidence that Dr. Shelton is providing to support her charge is simply useless and irrelevant.
Last April, U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew cautioned Japan against using currency depreciation to gain a trade advantage and he placed the country on a the“monitoring list” of potential currency manipulators. But in response, Japanese Finance Minister Taro Aso threatened to raise the bar, saying he was “prepared to undertake intervention” in the foreign-exchange market.
Obviously, the US government responds to pressures from domestic interests harmed by Japanese competition. Whether such back and forth between the American Treasury Secretary and his Japanese counterpart signifies anything beyond routine grandstanding I am not in a position to say.
China has long been intervening directly in the foreign-exchange market to manipulate the value of its currency. The People’s Bank of China announces a daily midpoint for the acceptable exchange rate between the yuan and the dollar, and then does not allow its currency to move more than 2% from the target price. When the value of the yuan starts to edge higher than the desired exchange rate, China’s government buys dollars to push it back down. When the yuan starts to drift lower than the desired rate, it sells off dollar reserves to buy back its own currency.
China’s government has reserves that amount to nearly $3 trillion. According to Mr. Lew, the U.S. should mute its criticism because China has spent nearly $1 trillion to cushion the yuan’s fall over the last 2½ years or so. In a veiled reproach to Mr. Trump’s intention to label China a currency manipulator, Mr. Lew said it was “analytically dangerous” to equate China’s current intervention policies with its earlier efforts to devalue its currency for purposes of gaining a trade advantage. China, he noted, would only be open to criticism that is “intellectually sound.”
Whether China is propping up exchange rates or holding them down, manipulation is manipulation and should not be overlooked. To be intellectually consistent, one must acknowledge that the distortions induced by government intervention in the foreign-exchange market affect both trade and capital flows. A country that props up the value of its currency against the dollar may have strategic goals for investing in U.S. assets.
Far from being intellectually consistent, Dr. Shelton is rushing headlong into intellectual incoherence. She has latched on to the mantra of “currency manipulation,” and she will not let go. How does Dr. Shelton imagine that the fixed exchange rates of the Bretton Woods era, for which she so fervently pines, were maintained?
I have no idea what she might be thinking, but the answer is that they were maintained by intervention into currency markets to keep exchange rates from deviating by more than a minimal amount from their target rates. So precisely the behavior that, under the Bretton Woods system, she extols wholeheartedly, she condemns mindlessly when now undertaken by the Chinese.
Again, my point is not that the Chinese have not engaged in exchange-rate protection in the past. I have actually suggested in earlier posts to which I have hyperlinked above that the Chinese have engaged in that practice. But that no longer appears to be the case, and Dr. Shelton is clearly unable to provide any evidence that the Chinese are still engaging in that practice.
[T]he . . . first step [to take] to address this issue [is] by questioning why there aren’t adequate rules in place to keep countries from manipulating their exchange rates.
The next step is to establish a universal set of rules based on monetary sovereignty and discipline that would allow nations to voluntarily participate in a trade agreement that did not permit them to undermine true competition by manipulating exchange rates.
I have actually just offered such a rule in case Dr. Shelton is interested. But I have little hope and no expectation that she is or will be.
13 Responses to “A Tutorial for Judy Shelton on the ABCs of Currency Manipulation”
1 Henry February 16, 2017 at 1:56 am
“How does Dr. Shelton imagine that the fixed exchange rates of the Bretton Woods era, for which she so fervently pines, were maintained?”
Many a speculative attack on currencies during the 1960s and 1970s were fended off by central banks getting together under the aegis of the Bank of International Settlements no less. CBs lent to each other and swapped foreign exchange to sure up the foreign exchange reserves of countries under BOPs pressure. It was a form of institutionalized currency manipulation and on a grand scale. These defences would assist for a time but, given the nature of the imbalances, speculators/adverse capital flows eventually forced realignments and ultimately the demise of the Bretton Woods system.
2 Scott Boone February 16, 2017 at 10:19 am
A “universal set of rules” is a nice idea and actually, we have lots of them to use as an example. However, human nature being what it is, such rules tend to get used in whatever manner is most advantageous to one party over another. In a perfect world, everyone would play fair, but sadly, that’s not the world in which we live.
3 William Ryan February 16, 2017 at 5:21 pm
We are just too late to the game. All the kings horses and all the kings men may never bring competitive advantage back gain. Concentrated wealth and political power wins again. The rig and gig economy will no doubt become a great thing in America because that is all that will be left standing.
4 Miguel Navascués February 17, 2017 at 11:59 am
Sorry, David, I’m not totally sure, but I think that an export surplus must produce, all other things equal, an outflow of capital. So, I suppose that the high export surplus in Germany is compensated by an similar financial outflow. That is the reason of the high accumulation of external assets by Germany, that finance the countries with deficit.
5 David Glasner February 27, 2017 at 10:33 am
Henry, Under a fixed exchange rate regime, a country can pursue independent monetary policy only to the extent that it is willing to allow an outflow of reserves or accept an inflow of reserves, or can rely on the forbearance of other countries that will continue to accept its liabilities. Under Bretton Woods, such forbearance was occasionally forthcoming, but it was not unlimited.
Scott, And it’s getting less so even as we speak.
William, I share your pessimism, but I’m not sure if it’s for the same reasons.
Miguel, An export surplus can be associated with an outflow or an inflow of capital depending on the circumstances. If there is net foreign investment, the inflow of capital will be associated with imported capital goods. However, there is an excess demand for money then goods must be exported in exchange for the money.
6 Henry March 4, 2017 at 9:42 pm
“Under Bretton Woods, such forbearance was occasionally forthcoming, but it was not unlimited. ”
I guess this is correct given that Bretton Woods eventually cracked under the pressure when the USA could no longer countenance demands for convertibility. However, the level of co-operation and co-ordination in the 1960s was fairly extensive. Everything that could be done to hold the system together was done from the creation of the Gold Pool, the defence of Sterling in 1964, the defence of the US dollar in the mid to late 1960s. It wasn’t all plain sailing – speculators eventually getting the upper hand and the odd breach appearing in the institutional barricades.
The point is that Dr. Shelton seems to think that the Bretton Woods game was played by the rules.
7 David Glasner March 7, 2017 at 9:11 am
Henry, Obviously there were rules that governed what countries and their central banks could do under Bretton Woods. The basic problem was that once countries were not fully committed to their exchange rate pegs and it was realized that the pegs could and would be changed when it was either appropriate or convenient to do so, confidence in the pegs began to weaken as countries and central banks pursued domestic objectives that were inconsistent with the currency pegs. The cooperative measures that you cite could be effective only while confidence in the maintenance of the pegs was high; as confidence weakened, the system was destined to unravel. That’s why I cringe whenever I see someone hold up Bretton Woods as some sort of model for an international monetary system.
8 Henry March 7, 2017 at 11:30 pm
“That’s why I cringe whenever I see someone hold up Bretton Woods as some sort of model for an international monetary system.”
I can’t understand it either – the Great Depression experience and then the Bretton Woods debacle – all to defend a system of fixed exchange rates – long term, it just doesn’t work. Now we have China edging the world to a similar system. I think it is fair to say that the Euro Zone is a system of fixed exchange rates (e.g. one German Euro = one Greek Euro) – with no end of trouble.
1 Nominal exchange rates, real exchange rates and protectionism, by Scott Sumner – Indilens Times Trackback on June 23, 2017 at 6:22 am
2 What Is This Thing Called “Currency Manipulation?” | Uneasy Money Trackback on June 28, 2017 at 1:39 pm
3 Defining Currency Manipulation for Scott Sumner | Uneasy Money Trackback on September 6, 2017 at 8:49 pm
4 Uneasy Money Trackback on April 24, 2019 at 8:57 pm
5 Dr. Shelton Remains Outspoken: She Should Have Known Better | Uneasy Money Trackback on July 11, 2019 at 10:35 pm


Trump Says He's Looking at Protections for Venezuelans in US
President Donald Trump speaks at the Republican Party of Iowa's annual dinner in West Des Moines, Iowa, June 11, 2019.
President Donald Trump said his administration is considering granting Temporary Protected Status to thousands of Venezuelans who have fled to the United States amid ongoing unrest.
The once-wealthy oil nation is now facing severe shortages of basic goods and hyperinflation. Trump said the situation in Venezuela is a horrible thing that's "been brewing for a long time."
Temporary Protected Status is granted to people from countries ravaged by natural disasters or war and lets them remain in the U.S. until the situation improves back home.
The Trump administration has moved to discontinue that protection for many countries. But when the president was asked Tuesday about TPS for Venezuelans, he said "we're looking at that very seriously."
Two congressional panels have advanced bills granting protections to Venezuelans, which conflicts with Trump's tough-on-immigration stance.
Carlos Vecchio, a government opponent who the U.S. recognizes as Venezuela's ambassador, speaks during a news conference in Miami, June 11, 2019.
Carlos Vecchio, who serves as ambassador to Washington for Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido, said at a Miami press conference Tuesday that he is confident that TPS or some other kind of relief for Venezuelans will come soon, either from the administration or from Congress.
The Trump administration was one of the first to recognized Guaido as the legitimate president of Venezuela, a measure that was adopted later by more than 50 other nations.
Vecchio thanked Trump for accepting the expired passports of Venezuelans living in the United States, and urged Canada, Spain and Latin American countries to do the same.
On Friday, the opposition-controlled National Assembly approved the validity of Venezuelan passports for five years beyond their printed expiration dates. The same day, the State Department announced that the expired passports will be considered valid for visa applications and entry into the United States.
Around 4 million Venezuelans have fled their country in recent years and many of them don't have a valid passport.


Blues, Avalanche attempt to get back on winning side
by Brian Hunter
AVALANCHE (14-3-0) at BLUES (11-2-3)
TV: RDS, ALT, FS-MW
Last 10: Colorado 8-2-0; St. Louis 6-1-3
Season series: This is the first of four meetings between the Colorado Avalanche and St. Louis Blues. The home team won all three games last season, two of them going to the Avalanche. The Blues did clinch a berth in the Stanley Cup Playoffs with a 3-1 win in the most recent matchup at Scottrade Center on April 23.
Big story: Each team is looking to avoid a losing streak. The Avalanche, who come off a 2-1 loss to the Carolina Hurricanes on Tuesday, haven't dropped consecutive games this season. The Blues, defeated 3-2 by the Phoenix Coyotes in overtime Tuesday, have lost two in a row on one prior occasion, but earned a point in each of those instances.
Team Scope:
Avalanche: Despite putting 34 shots on net, including a career-high nine from rookie Nathan MacKinnon and five from Matt Duchene, Colorado could only put one puck past Justin Peters and saw its six-game road win streak to begin the season go by the wayside.
Paul Stastny's power-play goal with 5:26 left in the second period put the Avalanche in position to at least salvage a point, but they never found the equalizer. A slow start was partially to blame for the defeat; the Hurricanes recorded 11 of the game's first 13 shots before the Avalanche began to control play.
"I think we played good enough to win," coach Patrick Roy said in The Denver Post. "We just have to get ready for the next one. Our motto is the same: One day at a time."
Blues: An Oliver Ekman-Larsson goal prevented St. Louis from setting the highest point total in franchise history through 16 games, but the Blues didn't come away empty-handed thanks to Roman Polak's game-tying goal early in the third period. Maxim Lapierre opened the scoring in the first, extending his point streak to three games.
"Our first focus is to play with good intensity and play strong defensively," Lapierre said in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. "Personally I would like to focus on coming back to the player I was about three or four years ago when I had that 15-goal season [for the Montreal Canadiens].
"Obviously I'm not expecting to score 15 goals every season, but maybe just play with the same confidence offensively with the puck and read the play better. I feel since the game in Montreal, I kind of feel that way. I felt like I was more relaxed with the puck and I see the ice better."
Who's hot: Stastny has three goals and one assist during a four-game point streak. … Blues forward Alexander Steen had the primary assist on Polak's goal to extend his point streak to 11 games, with 10 goals and four assists in that span.
Injury report: Colorado defenseman Ryan Wilson (back) and forward Alex Tanguay (knee) are out. … St. Louis defenseman Jordan Leopold (hand) and forward Magnus Paajarvi (upper body) are on injured reserve.


The Estonian National Museum’s building at Raadi. An essay on spatial culture
October 01, 2016 – Gregor Taul
The Estonian National Museum’s building at Raadi: an essay on spatial culture tells the story of the new home of the National Museum of Estonia. My essay, accompanied by plenty of visual material, took the form of five separate books/booklets.
Presentation of the book copied from behance by graphic designer team AKU.
The lower back side of the new building of the Estonian National Museum. It was built on the abandoned Raadi military airfield in Tartu.
The front side of the new building of the Estonian National Museum in Tartu.
This image shows the covers of the five different booklets. The base grid is more visible in every following chapter.
A composition with the slipcases that contain the five booklets.
Here you can see the cover of the first booklet.
This spread from the first booklet shows the contents of the slipcase – the titles of the five booklets.
The first, most capacious booklet, titled "The museum and spatial culture", gives an overview of the national museum's history and contemporary architecture in Estonia.
In this image, you can see the cover of the second booklet, titled "From the architectural design competition to construction".
Mikoff. Sculptures
Notes on Space. Monumental Painting in Estonia 1947–2012


Harvest One Selects 3 Sixty Secure Corp. to Provide Secure Transport, Secure Cannabis Storage and Retail Delivery Services
3 Sixty Risk Solutions Ltd.
Mar 19, 2019, 07:00 ET
/NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWS WIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES/
ALMONTE, ON, March 19, 2019 /CNW/ - 3 Sixty Risk Solutions Ltd. ("3 Sixty" or the "Company") (CSE: SAFE) (FSE: 62P2) is pleased to announce that the Company, which operates through its wholly-owned subsidiary, 3 Sixty Secure Corp., has been selected by Harvest One Cannabis Inc. ("Harvest One") (TSX-V: HVT) (OTCQX: HRVOF) to provide a portfolio of security services which include secure transport, secure cannabis storage and retail deliveries. Harvest One has a global portfolio of brands including United Greeneries, Satipharm, Dream Water, and Burb that serves the adult recreational and medical cannabis markets from cultivation to retail distribution. The global footprint of Harvest One, with a presence in five countries, aligns with 3 Sixty's strategic goals of realizing significant organic growth and accelerating growth using M&A to expand operations within Canada, the United States of America and internationally.
"Harvest One is a tremendous example of a company serving the full spectrum of customer needs from cultivation to production to retail distribution of top-quality products," said Thomas Gerstenecker, CEO and Founder of 3 Sixty. "It is led by expert growers, brilliant engineers and creative entrepreneurs and it has announced supply agreements in Ontario, British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. We look forward to supporting Harvest One as it expands its cultivation footprint and retail distribution network in Canada and internationally."
"We consider 3 Sixty to be a leading seed-to-sale security provider serving the cannabis industry," said Grant Froese, CEO of Harvest One. "We have consistently experienced their commitment to professionalism and deep expertise in security. As the legal cannabis industry grows in Canada, and internationally, we feel confident that the world-class security services provided by 3 Sixty will ensure the safety of our products and the timely distribution to our retail partners across Canada."
About 3 Sixty Risk Solutions Ltd.
3 Sixty Risk Solutions Ltd., operating through its wholly-owned subsidiary, 3 Sixty Secure Corp., is one of Canada's leading security service providers to the cannabis sector, transporting approximately $250 million of product every month. 3 Sixty provides cannabis security consulting, guarding and secure transport security services to more than 500 customers and more than 60 licensed cannabis producers, including some of the world's largest, such as licensed producers owned by Canopy Growth Corporation. 3 Sixty has a staff of over 275 employees and employs a fleet of over 60 vehicles, which management believes provides a combined security footprint to approximately 30 million square feet of patrolled area.
About Harvest One Cannabis Inc.
Harvest One is a global cannabis house of brands that develops and provides innovative health, wellness, and self care products to consumers and patients in regulated markets around the world. The Company's range of products are designed to enhance quality of life. Shareholders have significant exposure to the entire cannabis value chain through three wholly-owned subsidiaries: United Greeneries, a Licensed Producer; Satipharm (medical and nutraceutical); and Dream Water Global (consumer). For more information, please visit www.harvestone.com.
This news release contains "forward-looking information" and "forward-looking statements" (collectively, "forward-looking statements") within the meaning of the applicable Canadian securities legislation. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements and are based on expectations, estimates and projections as at the date of this news release. Any statement that involves discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance (often but not always using phrases such as "expects", or "does not expect", "is expected", "anticipates" or "does not anticipate", "plans", "budget", "scheduled", "forecasts", "estimates", "believes" or "intends" or variations of such words and phrases or stating that certain actions, events or results "may" or "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken to occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking statements. In this news release, forward-looking statements relate, among other things, to: the business and operations of 3 Sixty. Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable, are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors which may cause the actual results and future events to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to: general business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements and information contained in this news release. Except as required by law, 3 Sixty assumes no obligation to update the forward-looking statements of beliefs, opinions, projections, or other factors, should they change, except as required by law.
Neither the Canadian Securities Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the CSE) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
SOURCE 3 Sixty Risk Solutions Ltd.
For further information: regarding the Company, please contact: Carlo Rigillo, Chief Financial Officer, 3 Sixty Secure Corp., (866) 360-3360, IR@3sixtysecure.com
3 Sixty Provides Results of Annual General Meeting...
3 Sixty Secure Corp. to Provide Secure Transport and Guarding...
3 Sixty Secure Corp. Announces Security Guarding Contract with...