• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Показатели112
      • Показать ещё
      Люди468
      • Показать ещё
      Разное936
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы934
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации133
      • Показать ещё
      Компании1109
      • Показать ещё
      Формат23
      Издания131
      • Показать ещё
      Сферы1
Рейтинг Doing Business
14 сентября, 20:22

Ross: North Korea problem won't stop U.S. from cracking down on China trade

Working with China to solve the problem of North Korea's nuclear program does not hinder the United States' ability to get tough on Beijing's trade policy, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said on Thursday.Speaking at POLITICO's Pro Policy Summit, Ross said resolving the nuclear missile problem is the administration's "No. 1 priority.""The primary responsibility of the president is to protect the American people, so that has to be the sine qua non,” Ross said. But, he added, there is “nothing logically inconsistent with that and having a trade policy that’s better economically for us.”Asked specifically whether it’s inherently difficult to act tough toward people that you are asking for help, Ross sidestepped the question. “That’s a question of degrees,” he said.President Donald Trump and his administration have been grappling with how to fulfill campaign promises to crack down on China's trade policy while also asking for its help in reigning in North Korea. Trump earlier this month threatened to cut off all trade with any countries doing business with Pyongyang — a move that was likely aimed almost entirely at Beijing.Ross also said Trump's use of his presidential bully pulpit — and particularly his powerful Twitter feed — to call out individual companies and industries has been effective at home and at the World Trade Organization.Asked about Trump’s tendency to go after companies or business leaders from his perch in the West Wing, Ross responded: “You achieve a lot by doing that.”“I don’t think that some of the trade cases that are going to WTO would have gone nearly as well if people didn’t realize that he is somewhat skeptical about WTO,” Ross said. “I don’t think a lot of the corporate decisions about whether or not to go offshore would have been made the same way without the tweets.”

14 сентября, 19:01

Measures to create more entrepreneurs

CHINA’S Cabinet has released reform measures to boost support for innovation and entrepreneurship, and improve government service. China will encourage one-stop financing and investment services for

14 сентября, 17:27

Why Didn't Trump Build Anything in Russia?

  • 0

The art of the deal runs into the reality of “a really scary place.”

14 сентября, 17:27

Why Didn't Trump Build Anything in Russia?

The art of the deal runs into the reality of “a really scary place.”

11 сентября, 15:05

Nuclear Reaction: US threatens actions against UN doing business with North Korea

The UN Security Council is expected to vote on a resolution that would impose even tougher sanctions on North Korea following its latest nuclear test. RT's Caleb Maupin looks at what it would take for Washington to fulfill its economic threats. RT LIVE http://rt.com/on-air Subscribe to RT! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=RussiaToday Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTnews Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_com Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/rt Follow us on Google+ http://plus.google.com/+RT Listen to us on Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/rttv RT (Russia Today) is a global news network broadcasting from Moscow and Washington studios. RT is the first news channel to break the 1 billion YouTube views benchmark.

15 августа, 13:31

За 6 лет Украина достигла наибольшего прогресса в Doing Business — FT

За последние 6 лет Украина достигла наибольшего прогресса в рейтинге по легкости ведения бизнеса «Doing Business» среди всех стран постсоветского пространства. Об этом сообщает Financial Times, передает Экономическая правда. Согласно отчету Всемирного банка, с 2010 […]

30 июня, 17:22

Former Dutch Floating Prison Becomes A Boutique London Hotel In 2017

Combining "doing good with doing business" is the motto of this chic new London hotel on the banks of the river Thames which offers training to longterm unemployed locals, boosts the economy by buying local and donates profits to an educational charity in Guatemala.

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 23:40

How Enterprise Chatbot Platforms And AI Are Fundamentally Changing The Way We Do Business

Enterprise chatbot platforms and AI are fundamentally changing the way we do business, and it’s more important than ever that you stay current with this growing trend.

28 июня, 20:59

Fifa lets Qatar 2022 sail on, its moral lines in the sand still on the horizon | Marina Hyde

War fears, deaths, slavery … the main lesson of the Garcia report appears to be that there is no conceivable dealbreaker that could derail Qatar’s World CupThanks to the long overdue publication of the Garcia report into the bidding process for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, we now know that England’s efforts to secure the 2018 tournament amounted to “a form of bribery”. Obviously, the only thing less surprising than the fact that England break the rules is how bad they are at it. If an England bid team ever gets within 30 sniffs of actually winning a World Cup bid again, no effort should be spared in investigating how they do business. They are, in the words of pursed-lips grandmas, no better than they should be.For now, however, England remain as likely to win a World Cup bid as they do to win a World Cup, and we must turn our thoughts to more pressing questions raised by the report by Fifa’s then chief ethics investigator. Namely – and I don’t mean any disrespect to the emir and his accidental vagina stadium – is the Qatar World Cup a thought experiment? Continue reading...

28 июня, 15:56

7 questions for a foreigner seeking a job in Russia

“Endlessly challenging, endlessly stimulating and wholly worth it,” this is how HSBC Expat Explorer defines expat life, notwithstanding the country you chose to move in. Russia is not the worst choice. Russia’s growing economy provides many lucrative opportunities and niches for ambitious businessmen to choose from. There are no official (reliable) statistics on how many foreign citizens live and work in Russia, but judging by the number of international companies and expat-oriented restaurants and pubs in Moscow, it cannot be low. Would you be willing to join them? Here are answers to seven questions that you probably have before making such an important decision. 1. In what sector can I find work? Jobs for expats often tend to be in the highly skilled category and at the senior management level. There is a demand for foreign professionals in sectors such as construction, IT, engineering, transport, and teaching/academics. In addition, there could also be opportunities in humanitarian organizations, diplomatic missions, and international companies that have established branches in Russia. Acquiring a job in a branch might, however, be complicated because such openings are often filled with local or internal candidates. Other opportunities include doing freelance translation, teaching English, and working as a nanny or au pair. While there are many job-hunting websites in Russian, here a few useful links in English to get you started: Headhunter, XpatJobs, InJob. 2. Will I need a work permit? The hiring of foreign workers is strictly regulated by the government, so yes, you will need to have a work permit to settle in the country. The exceptions are foreigners with permanent or temporary residence permits, students, academic staff, accredited journalists, diplomats, and employees of some humanitarian organizations. Citizens of the Eurasian Economic Union’s member countries (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia) are free to live and work in Russia. To get you a standard work permit, the hiring company must have an authorized permit that allows it to employ a foreigner. The company can apply for a work permit on your behalf, after you sign a contract. You will have to submit necessary documents, including translated and certified professional or educational diplomas. If successful, the employer will forward you a visa invitation letter, which can be used to get a visa. Once you move to Russia, you can collect your work permit from the employer. 3. Do I need to be fluent in Russian? Good knowledge of Russian will help you a lot – not only in your interaction with Russians but also in job hunting. You will have a much better chance of finding a job if you are highly qualified and if you speak Russian. Plus, the majority of people in Moscow and across the country mostly speak Russian, so if you know the language it would be easier for you to settle in. If you’d like to study Russian there are many language schools across the country to choose from or you can learn the basics prior to your trip via online courses or schools in your country. 4. What does a working week in Russia look like? As is the case in most countries, the working week is usually from Monday to Friday with 40 hours on average. Every employer might set its own requirements for working hours but usually it is either from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. or from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. 5. What perks can I receive? You will have 28 days of paid leave and in some cases medical insurance, transport or mobile allowance.  The employer can also help with finding accommodation, language classes, and settling in the city. 6. What is the cost of living in Moscow? Moscow is no longer the most expensive city in Europe. In 2017 it made it to the top 20 and was ranked 14th in Mercer’s Cost of Living Survey.  It all, of course, depends on your needs, but life in Russia’s capital might be affordable if you are prepared to adapt to the local style of living. Accommodation might get expensive, but costs on food, transport, and entertainment may be quite reasonable. Check the list of potential costs brought together by Expatistan website.  7. Is there an expat community in Moscow? Yes, and it is big! Over the last two decades a whole new industry for expats has emerged. In busy cities like Moscow and St. Petersburg, where the majority of foreigners have settled, there are many cafes, restaurants, and clubs that cater to their needs and tastes. Papa’s Place on Nikolskaya Street, Hudson Bar on Belorusskaya, Standard on Kitai-Gorod and Bud House on Pushkinskaya are just a few places where members of the English-speaking expat community thrive. Check InterNations, the Moscow Expats community on Facebook, and Couchsurfing for upcoming gatherings and events taking place in Moscow. Getting to know fellow expats will provide you with invaluable insider information on the best employers, networking opportunities, and tips on doing business in Russia.

Выбор редакции
28 июня, 14:28

It's Time To Measure Inequality

The income gap is growing every day, and there is nothing systemic, in the way most companies do business now, that will bridge this chasm. Yet, one way or another, this problem must be fixed. And yes, business can do much to narrow that gap, even if our politically divided government can't.

28 июня, 13:30

Who Does Business Represent?

On whose behalf do business associations speak? It’s an increasingly urgent question, because while firms have radically changed how they think about themselves, business associations have yet to catch up, and the resulting lag is making capitalism less legitimate in many countries.

28 июня, 00:00

The Misery of Mitch McConnell

Frank Bruni, New York TimesFor a good laugh, or rather cry, zip backward to the beginning of 2014, when Democrats still had control of the Senate, and listen to Mitch McConnell’s lamentations about the way they were doing business. “Major legislation is now routinely drafted not in committee but in the majority leader’s conference room,” he declaimed on the Senate floor. “Bills should go through committee.” He pledged that if Republicans were “fortunate enough to gain the majority next year, they would.”

27 июня, 19:31

Remarks by the Vice President to the US-India Business Council

Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium Washington, D.C. 11:00 A.M. EDT   THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, Chairman Chambers, President Aghi, Ambassador Sarna, Ambassador Roemer, distinguished Members of Congress who joint us here today.  It is an honor to join you for the 42nd Annual Leadership Summit of the U.S.-India Business Council.  Give yourselves a round of applause.  This is a great, great annual event.  (Applause.)    I couldn’t be more grateful to join you at this important gathering.  And before I get started, I just left the Oval Office a little bit ago, and the President wanted me to bring greetings from a leader who has already strengthened the bond between the United States and India -- the 45th President of the United States of America, President Donald Trump.  (Applause.)    This conference is particularly timely.  As you all know, yesterday President Trump welcomed Prime Minister Modi to the White House.  I was there for most of the meetings.  It was a historic and productive time, and at its conclusion, standing next to the Prime Minister, President Trump declared that India had in his words a “true friend in the White House” -- and so do all of our friends from India who are gathered here.  (Applause.)    President Trump recognizes that the United States’ relationship with India is one of the most important strategic relationships in the 21st century.   Our two great nations are bound by friendship, by commerce -- so well represented by American and Indian businesses here.  And we're partners in the fight against global terrorism and as brothers-and-sisters in the cause of freedom and our commitment to democracy.  And today, I say with confidence:  Under the leadership of President Donald Trump, our friendship will grow deeper, our partnership will grow stronger for the benefit of both of our nations and our people -- and the world.  (Applause.)    As you well know, commerce is central to both of our nations’ prosperity and well-being; the commerce between us that is.  Fortunately, the United States and India have formed a strong trade relationship in recent years -- in no small part thanks to the work of the U.S.-India Business Council over these four decades.   And for more than 40 years, this council has brought together leaders in industry and leaders in public life to “promote bilateral trade,” foster investment, job growth, innovation in both of our nations.  And you’ve succeeded by any stretch of the word.  So why don't you give yourselves just one more round of applause for promoting a tremendous relationship between two great nations?  (Applause.)    And let me also offer the President and our entire administration’s congratulations to the two winners of this year’s Leadership Award who I just met in the back room -- Adi Godrej of the Godrej Group and my friend Andrew Liveris of Dow Chemical Company.  My congratulations to both of you for this well-deserved honor.  (Applause.)    And thanks to the companies represented in this room, the trade relationship between the United States and India is flourishing.  It’s remarkable to think that not even 20 years ago, two-way trade between our nations was less than $20 billion per year.  But by the end of last year, it had grown by more than 500 percent to an annual $115 billion in trade; and U.S. exports to India now support roughly 200,000 American jobs.   The last few years have been particularly noteworthy. Between 2014 and today, American foreign direct investment in India grew from $800 million to $2.4 billion in investments.   And on the other side of the ledger, Indian businesses I’m glad to report are investing in America at an unprecedented rate.  For instance:  Earlier this year, Infosys announced it would hire 10,000 new American workers at four U.S.-based technology centers, one of which will be in my home state of Indiana.  And we thank you for investing and believing in America.  (Applause.)    Our heartfelt appreciation to all the businesses represented here for your investment in our nation’s future.  Yet the truth is the United States and India we believe have only scratched the surface when it comes to bilateral investment and trade.  This council hopes to more than quadruple our two-way trade relationship to more than $500 billion before the decade is out, and the President and I believe that that goal is achievable.   Yesterday, President Trump and Prime Minister Modi committed to expanding and balancing our trade relationship in the years ahead.    For our part, this administration is fully committed to restoring the United States’ reputation as the premier investment destination anywhere in the world.  And let me assure everyone gathered here:  America is open for business once again.  (Applause.)    President Trump has already taken decisive action to make the strongest economy in the world stronger still.  This President has signed more laws to cut through red tape than any President in American history that already have saved businesses up to $18 billion in regulatory costs per year.   President Trump has put a renewed focus on American energy, approving the Keystone and Dakota Pipelines.  And the President is strengthening the American workforce by signing executive action into place to prioritize apprenticeships and vocational training to meet the needs of growing businesses and a growing American economy.   And if you haven’t noticed yet, the American people elected a builder to be President of the United States, and President Trump has already taken steps to rebuild America.  And before we're done we're going to rebuild the roads and bridges and harbors and airports of America to the very best in the world.  (Applause.)    And this year, let me assure you:  Working with the Congress, we’ll pass one of the largest tax cuts in American history so businesses from across the world can invest in American jobs, America’s workers, and America’s future.   And there’s one more thing, our President is also even as we speak fighting every day to give the American people the world-class health care they deserve.  And working with this Congress, I can say to the American businesses that are gathered here and all of you who do business in America, we're going to keep our promise the American people.  We're going to repeal and replace Obamacare and give the American people the kind of world-class healthcare they deserve.  And we're going to do it before the summer is out.  (Applause.)    Our hope is that President Trump’s actions give companies in this country great confidence about the future, but also give our friends in India even greater reason to invest in America.    And of course, American business wants to contribute even more to India’s success through exports and investment.  Prime Minister Modi saw American industry’s excitement about India on Sunday when he met with 21 business leaders before his bilateral meeting with our President.  There are many places where this nation’s firms can benefit our great partner.   India is projected to become the world’s third-largest market for planes and passengers.  American companies are already providing airport infrastructure and the airplanes themselves.  I just had the chance to meet with the CEO of SpiceJet who just last week placed an order for 40 brand new Boeing jets, on top of 100 new jets it ordered earlier this year.  I know that American companies are going to continue to give India’s aviation industry the wings it needs to soar.  And let me just take the opportunity, as the President did yesterday, to say thank you to SpiceJet for investing and believing in American workers and American businesses.  (Applause.)    Energy is another area for a more robust partnership.  India boasts the world’s fastest-growing economy.  But it can’t continue without energy, and American producers and grid developers are the best-suited to provide it.  From liquefied natural gas, to nuclear power, to clean coal, to everything in between, American energy and American expertise can help power India’s future.   The final example I’ll mention is in the area of security and defense.  A first-rate global power needs a first-rate military, and the United States will continue to enable the Indian armed forces to obtain the resources and technology it needs to protect the Indian people and support security in the region.  You need look no further than yesterday’s announcement that the United States will sell Sea Guardian UAVs, Apache attack helicopters, and C-17 transports to India.  That process of approval is all underway as we speak.  But I hope it accurately reflects the commitment to mutual security among both of our nations and the importance of our partnership for security.     The bottom line is the United States and India can deepen our commercial bond in many industries and areas.  But to achieve the highest possible benefit, I would suggest with great respect that India must continue to enact the necessary economic reforms to ensure that our trade relationship, as the President said last night over dinner, is both “fair and reciprocal.”   The President and I applaud Prime Minister Modi for his courageous move to simplify and standardize the Goods and Services Tax, the largest tax reform in India’s history.   We support Prime Minister Modi in his effort to strengthen Indiana’s -- India’s intellectual property protections, and cut tariffs on manufactured and agricultural goods, and break down the barriers to investment and market access.   But we truly believe with great respect that the time to act is now -- because progress in these areas means progress for both our great nations and the more than 1.6 billion people that call them home.   I know the U.S.-India Business Council will continue to play a leading role in promoting pro-growth policies and engaging new commercial partnerships.    And our administration is committed to this goal, as well. As the President announced yesterday, his daughter Ivanka Trump will lead the American delegation to the Global Entrepreneurship Summit in India this fall.   And I was very humbled when the Prime Minister Modi extended a personal invitation to me to represent the United States.  And we're already making plans to take him up on his invitation.  (Applause.)  In fact, I told him when I was governor of Indiana one of my ambitions was to be the first governor from Indiana to visit India.  (Laughter.)  I didn't get it done then, but the Prime Minister and I had a nice chuckle because he told me that the words “India ana” mean “coming to India.”  (Applause.)     The President and I are very confident that with the help of this great council, with the commitment that the President and Prime Minister Modi renewed yesterday, we’re going to usher in a new era of jobs, opportunity, and prosperity for both our countries and for all our people.   But as we all reflect that security is the foundation of our prosperity, and under the leadership of President Trump, the United States will also expand our partnership with India to protect our nations, our citizens, and the values that we cherish.   Yesterday, President Trump reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to our in his words “incredibly important” “security partnership” with India.   We’re proud that India is a Major Defense Partner for the United States.  And as the President said yesterday, “our militaries are working every day and will continue to enhance cooperation,” and working together, we’ll “make great strides in defeating the common threats” that we face.   The United States and India seek the same objectives in the Indo-Pacific region:  prosperity, security, peace.   We both want to uphold a rules-based system of national sovereignty and international law.  We both want lawful commerce to flow unimpeded on the seas and in the air.  (Applause.)    These practices and principles are foundational to prosperity and security across the Indo-Pacific, and the United States is grateful to see India step into its role as a regional security provider and partner.   But our two nations’ mutual interests stretch far beyond the region.  As India has grown, so has its role on the world stage.  And in recognition of this fact, let me assure you: President Trump and our administration fully support India’s permanent membership on a reformed United Nations Security Council.  (Applause.)    In this time of widening challenges and unknowable threats, the United States welcomes India’s strong bilateral relationships with our common friends and partners across the world, such as Japan and Australia, countries across the Middle East and Southeast Asia because we increasingly -- all of us -- face the same issues and face the same challenges.   Of course, the greatest threat facing the peace and prosperity of Indo-Pacific region is the brutal regime in North Korea.  President Trump and I are grateful for India’s leadership in fully implementing the United Nations’ sanctions and for its commitment to use its growing global leverage to increase diplomatic and economic pressure on North Korea.    We must not waver in our resolve.  North Korea’s reckless actions are a threat to us all, and so all of us must continue to step forward to work in close cooperation with one another and all our allies and partners in the region to ensure that we bring the appropriate amount of economic and diplomatic pressure until North Korea permanently abandons its nuclear and ballistic missile programs once and for all.  (Applause.)    Let me also thank India for its continued commitment to stability and security in Afghanistan.  A peaceful Afghanistan is good for India, it’s good for America, and a peaceful Afghanistan is good for the region and the wider world.    And finally, the United States and India are committed to strengthening our partnership in the fight against the greatest evil of our time -- the threat of global terrorism.   Like the United States, India is all too familiar with the grave danger posed by radical Islamic terrorists.  These barbarians have struck on Indian soil too many times over the decades, including the horrific attacks in Mumbai nearly a decade ago, claiming the lives of more than 160 innocents, including six Americans.   The United States and India already collaborate to a significant extent.  But in the face of terror networks that are ever-more sophisticated, ever-more dispersed, we will continue to take renewed action to facilitate two-way information and intelligence sharing to confront this threat.    Only by working together can we protect our people from the terrorist threat.  President Trump and Prime Minister Modi have already agreed to strengthen our partnership for the protection of both of our nations and our people, and together, I am convinced in our time, we will drive the cancer of global terrorism from the face of the Earth.  (Applause.)    This is a very exciting time for the relationship between the United States and India.  I could see it in the faces of the two leaders yesterday and in the warm exchanges that took place between our delegations.   As President Trump said just last night, the “future of our partnership has never looked brighter.”  And I believe it.  Long after the cameras left the Blue Room, we had an engaging time together -- warm fellowship among friends.  As Prime Minister Modi would say across the table as we talked about issues of mutual interest, he said, we speak to one another as friends.  And we always will.   Every day, the people of India and the people of the America are drawing closer together.  At this very moment, some 4 million Americans trace their heritage back to India already, as the children and grandchildren of immigrants, or as first-generation immigrants themselves.    And truth be told, their impact on America has made a profound difference in the life of our nation, and we celebrate that.  Let’s hear a round of applause for all our Indian Americans.  (Applause.)    For generations, you Indian Americans have raised your families, built businesses, studied and taught in our colleges and universities, made your own mark, large and small, and been an inexorably vital part of the beautiful tapestry of American life.   And we celebrate it.   As I stand before you today, I can’t help but feel a small measure of pride on behalf of the President to think of the first Indian American to serve on the Cabinet of a President of the United States, the Ambassador to the United Nations for our nation, Ambassador Nikki Haley.  (Applause.)    The people of the United States and the people of India already share a friendship -- and more than that, we share a future.    I believe our two nations have the power, have the vision, the shared ideals to guide this still-new century to greater prosperity and greater freedom together.  I truly believe it’s our responsibility to help guide countries around the world by our example on the path to prosperity, to guide it on a path to security.  And I believe it is the responsibility of the United States and India to do this together, to guide the 21st century on a path to democracy and freedom.      We hold the future in our hands -- but I have faith -- that with your help, and the continued energy of all the great men and women who have been a part of this council for some 40 years, with the leadership of President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Modi, and with God’s help, that the best days for America and India are yet to come.   Thank you for the honor of addressing you today.  God bless you all and God bless the nation of India and the United States of America.  (Applause.)    END   11:20 A.M. EDT  

27 июня, 19:01

Fastest growth in 18 months

CHINA is to increase access to the service and manufacturing sectors, relax restrictions on foreign ownership and treat Chinese and foreign companies on an equal basis, Premier Li Keqiang said yesterday. He

27 июня, 13:04

EU slaps Google with record $2.7 billion fine

Read full story for latest details.

25 июня, 12:00

11 epic fails in Hollywood movies that are related to Russia

1. Independence Day (1996) The world faces imminent destruction, and Americans are watching news from Russia, but it's still called “Soviet Central News,” even though the USSR collapsed in 1991. (15 min 1 sec) Independence Day. / Screenshot from film Strange map of Russia. Novosibirsk gets extra letters (Novosyoyrsk), Moscow moved to the Urals, and instead of St. Petersburg we see Petrograd – the city's name in 1914-1924. Independence Day. / Screenshot from film Russian military headquarters is located near a church, and if it's camouflage then why are these warplanes not covered? (1 hour 42 min) Independence Day. / Screenshot from film At headquarters, the Russian military for some strange reason prefers candles instead of electric lights. Again 1914? Independence Day. / Screenshot from film 2. The Bourne Identity (2002), and The Bourne Supremacy (2004) Everything was fine until Bourne found his Russian passport (17 min).  In Russian, his name is written as Ащьф ЛШТШФУМ (Ascshf LSHTSHFUM), which somehow is translated as Foma Kiniaev (yes, an ‘ordinary’ Russian name). Of course, the Russian letters are absolutely meaningless nonsense. The Bourne Identity. / Screenshot from film The filmmakers tried to fix this fail in the movie sequel, The Bourne Supremacy, but something went wrong again  - the ‘I’ (И) is one too many here, and the surname is Kiniyaev instead of Kiniaev. Moscow again is written as “Moscou.” (1 hour 18 min) The Bourne Supremacy. / Screenshot from film In Moscow, Bourne is looking for a girl, and a woman tells him her address – 16 Otradnaya Street. However, if he'd search for the street as it was written in the subtitles, he'd never find it. (1 hour 24 min). The Bourne Supremacy. / Screenshot from film 3. RED (2010) Everybody knows that in Russia it’s always cold, which is why when Frank Moses comes to the Russian Embassy we see snow all around, and Marvin wears a winter hat and parka. The embassy’s building is decorated by a bear, of course. (44 min 35 sec) RED. / Screenshot from film When Moses enters the building we see many titles, one of which has the meaning - careful analysis («Тщательный анализ»). We don’t know what is “sostrazanne” (and why it's 45 percent), as well as “format direktivy.” Other words are just a bunch of symbols that mean nothing. (45 min) RED. / Screenshot from film 4. Fantastic Four (2005) The creators of the Fantastic Four movie came up with a fantastic name for the ship – the “Toe head” (Головка пальца ноги) (1 hours 37 min). Fantastic Four. / Screenshot from film 5. A Good Day to Die Hard (2013) In the beginning we see the case of John McClane’s son, written in Russian. Again, the Hollywood script writers forgot that in Russia we first write the date and then the month. A Good Day to Die Hard. / Screenshot from film The main heroes decide to cross the Russian-Ukrainian border unnoticed after stealing a Maybach (why do they think it’s the best idea?) that they broke into with a kind of metal bar. Of course, there was no alarm; the car owner probably spent all his money on the vehicle. (59 min) A Good Day to Die Hard. / Screenshot from film In the U.S., some places show the number of a town's inhabitants on road signs. But Russia and Ukraine don't have such a tradition. (Here we see: “Pripyat, population 50,000”) (1 hour 2 min 38 sec) A Good Day to Die Hard. / Screenshot from film 6. Iron Man 2 (2010) Russia is integral to this superhero movie, but it seems quite certain that the script writers didn’t have a Russian-speaking adviser. For example, on the screen instead of “Live” we see "At present” (Теперь). (54 sec., 17 min. 18 sec.) And there's "U.S. Senators a question Tony Stark;" instead of “U.S. Senators question Tony Stark.” Iron Man 2. / Screenshot from film When the squad of bad robots aims at visitors to the exhibition, we are shown a screen that says  "target," in which it’s written in Russian that something "prohibits passage according to the references available in the document." (запрещает проход по ссылкам, имеющимся в документе) (1 hour 39 min) Iron Man 2. / Screenshot from film Then – “Allows passage according to the references available in the document. ” (разрешает проход по ссылкам, имеющимся в документе). Iron Man 2. / Screenshot from film 7. RocknRolla (2009) In Guy Ritchie’s world, Russian oligarchs do business not only through negotiations. At the same time, English subtitles often do not coincide with the speech of ‘Russian’ actors. For example, the phrase “I want you to keep an eye on this snake” was translated as “I want you and the czar to keep an eye on her.” What czar? (49 min) RocknRolla. / Screenshot from film 8. Salt (2010) Of course, when making a film about a gorgeous Russian secret agent the producers have to add all sorts of things with Cyrillic titles. But does she really need to keep on her CIA desk a pennant with the words, “To participants in the fighting in Chechnya.” Really? It's strange there were no matryoshkas and balalaikas at her home. (5 min 26 sec). Salt. / Screenshot from film Orlov’s questioning: Vassily instead of Vassilievich (9 min 11 sec). Salt. / Screenshot from film 9. Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011) The new Russia is so cool. Seems this is the poshest prison in Russia, and the walls are illuminated like the Hermitage. (2 min 14 sec) Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film Hollywood still saves money not hiring Russian-speaking advisers. The title at the security monitor is just a random set of letters (4 min 28 sec). Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film It's 2011, but in central Moscow we see an old payphone that costs two Soviet kopeks. (17 min 45 sec, and 19 min 38 sec). Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film This payphone turns into a device for secret communications, and shows Tom Cruise his new Russian documents with the name of “Anatoly Fedorov,” that will help him to penetrate the Kremlin. (18 min 37 sec) Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film At the Kremlin, however, he somehow became “Alexander Samokhvalov.” (22 min 49 sec) Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film Again, thrilling news from Mother Russia. Does anybody know what’s “Red Schuare“ (Ред Счуаре)? (36 min 25 sec). Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film We just wonder if all secret suitcases have the words, “Status of the Russia nuclear warhead,” even without its name? Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film The Russian alphabet has 33 letters, but the villain’s keyboard has only 29. (1 hour 49 min 18 sec) Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. / Screenshot from film 10. The Fate of the Furious (2017) Cool guys, chases and the eight part of the famous movie series. Car racers go to Russia's Arctic region, to the unknown area of Vladovin. Of course, it's best to do it with a red supercar. (1 hour 29 min 45 sec) The Fate of the Furious. / Screenshot from film Why did they write “dangerous” on the helicopter? (1 hour 31 min) The Fate of the Furious. / Screenshot from film 11. John Wick (2014) Our list ends with this thriller. Does anyone know why the Russian mafia refers to Wick as “Baba Yaga”? Strange that the killer has a nickname of an old fairytale witch that lives in a forest and eats children.  John Wick. / Screenshot from film Did we miss anything? Write your commentary below! 

25 июня, 05:28

U.S. lawmakers urge Trump to press Modi on trade, investment

Leading U.S. congressmen have called on President Donald Trump to press Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to remove barriers to U.S. trade and investment when they meet for the first time on Monday. The lawmakers, from the Republican and Democratic parties, said in a letter to Trump that high-level engagement with India had failed to eliminate major trade and investment barriers and had not deterred India from imposing new ones. "Many sectors of the Indian economy remain highly and unjustifiably protected, and India continues to be a difficult place for American companies to do business," they wrote, noting that a 2017 World Bank report ranked India 130th out of 190 countries for ease of doing business.

24 июня, 15:00

Kentucky's Hedge Funder Governor Keeps State Money In Secretive Hedge Funds

  • 0

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); Kentucky’s public pension system is a long-running, worst-in-the-nation disaster. Even as state workers chip in their fair share, the system suffers from years of chronic underfunding by the state. Seeking higher returns, the program, formally known as Kentucky Retirement Systems, has turned to “alternative investments” such as private equity and hedge funds. But those funds also carry far more risk than traditional investments in stocks and bonds ― and much higher fees.  The year before the state’s Republican governor, Matt Bevin, was elected, the pension system had 25 percent more alternative investments than its peers, 27 percent higher costs and 15 percent lower long-term returns, according to a report prepared for the pension board. As a part-owner of a hedge fund himself, Bevin said in 2015 that he didn’t have a problem with the pension system’s heavy reliance on alternative investments like hedge funds. But he campaigned on promises to improve the system and shore it up for the future. He hasn’t. Despite the Republican Party being in total control of Kentucky state government for the first time in nearly a century, the actual policy changes Bevin has implemented or overseen have mainly ended up supporting the system’s ruinous status quo. And some legislators are raising concerns that state officials ― potentially including Bevin himself ― could benefit financially from the system. Maintaining Kentucky’s status quo requires that oversight be finely balanced between people who are deeply invested in the current system and people who have very little idea of what’s going on. Since taking office in December 2015, Bevin has picked a former hedge fund director, a current hedge fund owner and a dermatologist to serve on the board that watches over the pension system. In February 2017, he signed bipartisan legislation that shielded the board from disclosing how much it paid some investment managers and prevented it from opening its contract process to competitive bidding. Under Bevin’s watch, the pension fund has continued to rely on alternative investments. It makes no sense, some state lawmakers argue, to overpay for risky financial products that rarely outperform the market. The retirements of as many as 350,000 public employees ― including social and mental health workers, university staff and others ― are at stake. Experts, including legendary investor Warren Buffett, agree. Buffett has long advocated against alternative investments, saying it’s better to focus on simpler options that deliver better returns.  “I’ve talked to huge pension funds, and I’ve taken them through the math, and when I leave, they go out and hire a bunch of consultants and pay them a lot of money,” Buffett said last year. “It’s just unbelievable.” The potential for corruption is also much greater when funds invest in these types of assets over “plain vanilla stocks and bonds,” said Lynn Stout, a professor of corporate and business law at Cornell University. But Kentucky continues to transfer tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to hedge fund managers. And the state’s front-line public servants are still wondering if the pension money will be there when they need it. By the time Bevin took office, Kentucky’s public pension system was among the worst-funded in the nation, according to a 2016 study from S&P Global Ratings. The pensions overseen by Kentucky Retirement Systems had just 37 percent of the money required to pay current and future retirees. The largest of the three funds ― Kentucky Employees Retirement System, which covers virtually all state employees except teachers, legislators, judges and state police ― had only enough money to cover 17 percent of its obligations. Bevin’s first budget, released in January 2016, proposed a larger-than-required monetary commitment to pensions. The legislature eventually passed a budget that put $1.2 billion toward the troubled system. The governor’s effort to remake the system really got rolling in April that year, when he fired Thomas Elliott, the chairman of the Kentucky Retirement Systems board of trustees and a former banker. Elliott had been reappointed to a four-year term in 2015 by the previous governor. His firing was meant to give Kentucky “a fresh start and more transparency,” Bevin’s spokeswoman said at the time. Elliott didn’t go quietly ― he chaired the board’s April meeting despite Bevin’s order removing him. The governor picked a dermatologist to replace Elliott, but that individual never assumed the seat, withdrawing in May after the state attorney general said he lacked the requisite investment experience and that Elliott’s firing had been improper. Bevin showed up at the board’s May meeting with state troopers to physically bar Elliott from acting as chair. Bevin’s appointments included two hedge fund managers. One was Neil Ramsey, the owner of Louisville, Kentucky-based hedge fund RQSI Holdings. Throughout the turmoil, Kentucky Retirement Systems didn’t just continue to invest in hedge funds ― it intensified its commitment. In May 2016, the board dumped $300 million more into four new hedge funds and increased its investment in another hedge fund, created for Kentucky by KKR Prisma, that itself invests in hedge funds. The following month, Bevin, whose spokesperson did not respond to multiple requests for comment for this article, announced that he would reorganize the entire board of trustees. By executive order, he expanded the board from 13 to 17 members and named economist John Farris as its chairman. The new structure allowed Bevin to appoint seven board members right away. In response, Elliott and another trustee sued Bevin. That lawsuit is ongoing, and Elliott remains a non-voting member of the board thanks to a court order. Bevin’s appointments included two hedge fund managers. One was Neil Ramsey, the owner of Louisville, Kentucky-based hedge fund RQSI Holdings. Ramsey, along with his wife, contributed $4,000 to Bevin’s gubernatorial campaign and $15,000 to his inaugural committee, state records show. He also appears to own two other investment companies, according to Securities and Exchange Commission filings: d.Quant Special Opportunities Fund, which late last year acquired a majority stake in another company called ZAIS Group Holdings. Neither of those firms is listed on the most recent version of Ramsey’s financial disclosure form, a copy of which HuffPost obtained through an open records request. Ramsey did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The other new board member was William Cook, a former director and senior portfolio manager at KKR Prisma, the company that created the fund of funds for Kentucky Retirement Systems. Cook, who retired from KKR Prisma in 2015, said he would recuse himself from any investment decisions involving his former company. This past November, as both Democratic and Republican members of the state legislature called on the pension board to divest from hedge funds, the board abruptly changed course and proposed to cut those investments in half. It would divest from 12 hedge funds altogether, and its investment in the KKR Prisma fund would return to the prior lower level. That decision was finalized in December 2016, but it’s not clear how much headway the pension board has made on the promise. Overall, big institutional investors like pension funds hold a declining, albeit still large, share of hedge funds’ assets. Some pension systems, such as those in California and New York City, have said they will divest entirely from hedge funds. New York City is just getting started, while California’s investment is down 80 percent since 2014. Kentucky’s progress is less impressive. As of March 2015, the state’s pension program had 10.6 percent of its $16 billion worth of assets in hedge funds. As of March 2017, that number was 8.4 percent, a large portion of which is still in the KKR Prisma fund. After the pension board’s drama, the Kentucky state legislature took up a measure, known as Senate Bill 2, that had been a priority for reform-minded Republicans and Democrats for more than two years. Its primary aim was to increase transparency around and reduce the costs of the pension investments. Past versions of the bill, sponsored by state Sen. Joe Bowen (R), included two significant provisions that would have required Kentucky Retirement Systems to disclose the fees it paid to all investment managers ― including managers of the hedge funds within the KKR Prisma fund ― and would have opened up the process of selecting the firms that oversee the pension program’s investments to a competitive bidding process. Currently, state pension officials hire whomever they want to oversee pension assets, and pay whatever fees they think are fair.  The provision requiring disclosure of all management fees was particularly important, given that the KKR Prisma fund is one of the system’s largest hedge fund investments. Generally, funds of hedge funds are used by individual investors who cannot put money directly into hedge funds. Even for those people, funds of funds are rarely a good deal, because they come with an extra layer of fees that goes to the fund-of-funds manager, on top of the fees paid to the underlying hedge funds. This structure makes even less sense for an investor, like Kentucky Retirement Systems, that can and does put money directly into hedge funds. Kentucky may have gravitated to the fund of funds because KKR Prisma offered a part-time pension employee as part of the deal. Yet that seems to suggest that the pension program didn’t have the in-house expertise or staffing levels needed to invest in hedge funds, let alone a fund of hedge funds. Measures to require full fee disclosure and competitive bidding were noticeably absent from this year’s version of SB 2, and an amendment to reinsert them was defeated on the House floor. Instead, the latest bill mandated more granular disclosure of fees (but didn’t cover fees paid to underlying funds), strengthened the requirement that pension board members have investment experience (a provision that likely would have precluded Bevin from appointing a dermatologist), and cemented Bevin’s reworking of the board’s structure. These changes were supported by both parties and passed unanimously in February. How the two stronger provisions disappeared from the bill “is a mystery,” said state Rep. Jim Wayne (D), who has for years fought for pension reforms, including the divestment of hedge fund investments. Kentucky Retirement Systems, as it had in the past, opposed full fee transparency and competitive bidding on the grounds that those requirements would make the pension funds less competitive, as investment managers would be less likely to do business with them if their books had to be open. The overall legislation was “a compromise that I worked out with KRS,” Bowen told HuffPost. He suggested that it will still reduce costs and increase transparency because it requires the board to develop best practices for managing assets and picking contractors, and then get those guidelines approved by the state government’s Finance and Administration Cabinet. Secret deals don’t help anybody. We’re taking their assumption that we’re getting a good deal, but it’s a secret. And the performance in the market proves that it has been a bad deal for Kentucky. Rep. James Kay, who has spearheaded Democratic pension reform efforts Some Kentucky lawmakers wondered whether Bevin had been involved in the watering down of SB 2, even as they stressed there were no clear links. Given his history in the investment field and the new makeup of the board, “it would not surprise me if he had a hand in that process,” Wayne said. Bowen said that while he’d discussed parts of the legislation with the governor’s office, he’d heard “nothing contrary” from Bevin about the two provisions that were cut. Regardless, the removal of those provisions, pension experts said, will be a boon to the Wall Street firms and investment managers that are charged with managing Kentucky’s investments. In 2015 alone, the state paid more than $100 million in investment fees related to its pensions. “The last minute gutting of SB 2 of competitive bidding and weakening of fiduciary standards I believe was worth in the $10′s of millions for the hedge fund & private equity industries,” Christopher Tobe, a former member of the pension board, said in an email. Tobe wrote Kentucky Fried Pensions, a 2013 book that explores the system’s “culture of cover-up and corruption.” Kentucky is paying those exorbitant fees even as its hedge fund investments cost it even more money. The KKR Prisma fund had a negative 8 percent return in 2016, helping Kentucky Retirement Systems finish the year with a 0.5 percent loss overall. The stock market, the Lexington Herald-Leader noted, rose an average of 15 percent over the same period. A spokesperson for KKR declined to comment after she was sent detailed questions about the company’s role in Kentucky’s pension system. Before SB 2 passed, state Rep. James Kay, who has spearheaded Democratic pension reform efforts, introduced an amendment that would have restored the provision requiring the disclosure of fees paid to all investment managers. He doesn’t buy the pension board’s argument against it. “If they don’t want to do business with us because they don’t want to be transparent, that should be the first sign of trouble,” Kay told HuffPost. “Secret deals don’t help anybody. We’re taking their assumption that we’re getting a good deal, but it’s a secret. And the performance in the market proves that it has been a bad deal for Kentucky.” Lawmakers have also raised the possibility that Kentucky’s elected and appointed officials ― including Bevin, state legislators and members of the pension board ― could benefit financially from the continued opacity of the hedge fund investments. If the KKR Prisma fund’s undisclosed investments include any of the hedge funds that officials own or operate, that would be problematic, Kay said on Kentucky’s public television network earlier this month. Because there’s no transparency, the Kentucky pension system could be investing in hedge funds owned or operated by general assembly members, people on the pension system’s board or even the governor himself, Kay said. “There could be people that could actually vote to enrich themselves on our current retirement board.” There is no proof that Bevin or any of his associates or appointees are benefiting in such a manner. But the idea that they could isn’t just a hypothetical: Heavy reliance on opaque hedge funds and funds of funds has greased the wheels in the past for pay-to-play scandals in major state pension funds, including California’s and New York’s, said Edward Siedle, a former SEC attorney who now forensically investigates public pension systems. “It’s a way of creating, potentially, a political daisy chain,” Siedle told HuffPost. How would that work? In Seidle’s version, the manager of a fund of hedge funds could suggest that the managers of the underlying funds contribute to an elected official’s campaign, causes or business associates. That supportive effort might help the fund-of-funds manager get hired by a public pension system connected to the elected official. Once hired, the fund-of-funds manager could then direct business back to those other managers. “Everybody’s happy,” Seidle said. “Because of the lack of transparency, it’s hard to tell. But ... the potential for personal profit is enormous.” Questions about Bevin’s pension moves have intensified in recent months, as one of his appointments began to draw scrutiny thanks to a mansion in a posh Louisville suburb. In March, the Louisville Courier-Journal reported that Bevin appeared to be living in a restored mansion in Anchorage, one of Kentucky’s wealthiest cities. The home had recently been sold by Anchorage LLC to another entity called Anchorage Place LLC. The owners of Anchorage Place LLC aren’t listed on public documents, but Bevin admitted in May that he owns the entity. Anchorage LLC, meanwhile, is owned by Neil Ramsey, the hedge fund manager Bevin had appointed to the pension board eight months prior. And it appeared the mansion had been sold at a discounted price. Last year, the Courier-Journal reported, the Jefferson County property valuation administrator assessed the mansion and the 19-acre property on which it sat at nearly $3 million. The sale to Anchorage Place LLC included the mansion and 10 of those acres ― property that was altogether worth $2.57 million, according to the Courier-Journal. The sale price, however, was just $1.6 million ― a reduction of $970,000.  This is one of the worst cases of personal enrichment by a governor. Kentucky Attorney General Andy Beshear (D) The house wasn’t Ramsey’s only financial connection to Bevin. In May, the Courier-Journal reported that Ramsey had also invested $300,000 in Neuronetrix, a Louisville-based medical device company with ties to Bevin. That investment occurred in February ― at the same time the legislature was considering SB 2 and right as Bevin began living in the Anchorage house. The governor owns at least 5 percent of Neuronetrix and sits on its board of directors, according to the paper. The Neuronetrix investment qualified Ramsey for a significant tax break. Selling the mansion at a potential loss did too. During the two months after the mansion’s sale, Bevin “largely ignored” questions about it, according to the Courier-Journal. He told the Herald-Leader that where he lived was not a matter of public interest. The governor called Courier-Journal reporter Tom Loftus, who led the paper’s mansion coverage, “Peeping Tom” and dismissed reporters who questioned his purchase of the house as “cicadas.” The state’s two largest newspapers, he said, “don’t actually seem to care about Kentucky.” Ramsey has maintained that he sold the house at fair market value. Bevin similarly batted down questions about the price during a late-May news conference in which he finally admitted he had bought the mansion. “It is arguably not even worth what was paid for it,” he said, “let alone what it’s being assessed at.” Bevin has even appealed the assessment. But his non-answers have not put the issue to rest. The governor is facing two separate ethics complaints around his acquisition of the mansion. Attorney General Andy Beshear (D), the son of Bevin’s predecessor and a potential gubernatorial candidate in 2019, has asked the state’s Executive Branch Ethics Commission if his office is the appropriate venue to investigate the sale and whether Bevin and Ramsey violated state ethics laws by personally benefiting from it. “This is one of the worst cases of personal enrichment by a governor,” Beshear said in May. “News reports suggest he is personally enriching himself and his friends, getting a Louisville mansion at half the price from a state contractor, donor and political appointee. ... Because the governor refuses to be direct and honest, someone must investigate.” Bevin continues to dismiss his critics. In that May news conference, he tied the mansion and Ramsey’s involvement back to the pension crisis that he says he is still trying to fix. “People that are making the decisions to actually fix the pension system,” Bevin told reporters, “are the very same people that you’re trying to destroy.” (Disclosure: Travis Waldron interned on the summer of 2009 for the Senate primary campaign of Jack Conway, who ran as the Democratic candidate for governor in 2015 against Bevin.) -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

23 июня, 12:05

6 Reasons Salespeople Win or Lose a Sale

Steven Moore for HBR Why does a salesperson lose a sale? It’s a question I’ve studied for years, as part of the win-loss analysis research I conduct. There’s a tendency to assume that the salesperson lost because their product was inferior in some way. However, in the majority of interviews buyers rank all the feature sets of the competing products as being roughly equal. This suggests that other factors separate the winner from the losers. In order to identify these hidden decision-making factors, more than 230 buyers completed a 76-part survey. The research project goals were to understand how customers perceive the salespeople they meet with, explore the circumstances that determine which vendor is selected, and learn how different company departments and vertical industries make buying decisions. We had six key research findings: #1: Some Customers Want to be Challenged What selling style do prospective buyers prefer? The survey shows 40% of study participants prefer a salesperson who listens, understands, and then matches their solution to solve a specific problem. Another 30% prefer a salesperson who earns their trust by making them feel comfortable, because they will take care of the customer’s long-term needs. Another 30% want a salesperson who challenges their thoughts and perceptions and then prescribes a solution that they may not have known about. From a departmental perspective, under 20% of accounting and IT staffers want to be challenged, while 43% of the engineering department does. Over 50% of marketing and IT prefer a salesperson who will listen and match a solution to solve their specific needs. The sales department equally preferred having a salesperson listen and solve their needs and being challenged; HR was equally split across all three selling styles. There’s an interesting explanation for selling styles preferences, which is based on whether the buyer is comfortable with conflict. Seventy-eight percent of participants who preferred a salesperson who would listen and solve their specific needs agreed with the statement: “I try to avoid conflict as much as I can.” Conversely, 64% of participants who preferred a salesperson who challenges their thoughts disagreed with the statement and are comfortable with conflict. #2: It’s Really a Committee of One Whenever a company makes a purchase decision that involves a team of people, factors including self-interests, politics, and group dynamics will influence the final decision. Tension, drama, and conflict are normal parts of group dynamics, because purchase decisions typically are not made unanimously. One critical research finding is that 90% of study participants confirmed that there is always or usually one member of the evaluation committee who tries to influence and bully the decision their way. Moreover, this person is successful in getting the vendor they want selected 89% of the time. In practicality, it can be said that a salesperson doesn’t have to win over the entire selection committee, only the individual who dominates it. #3: Market Leaders Have an Edge In most industries a single company controls the market. Compared with their competitors, they have a much larger market share, top-of-the-line products, greater marketing budget and reach, and more company cachet. For salespeople who have to compete against these industry giants, life can be very intimidating indeed. However, the study results provide some good news in this regard. Buyers aren’t necessarily fixated on the market leader and are more than willing to select second-tier competitors than one might expect. In fact, only 33% of participants indicated they prefer the most prestigious, best-known brand with the highest functionality and cost. Conversely, 63% said they would select a fairly well-known brand with 85% of the functionality at 80% of the cost. However, only 5% would select a relatively unknown brand with 75% of the functionality at 60% of the cost of the best-known brand. Not surprisingly, the answer to this question differed by industry. The fashion and finance verticals had the highest propensity to select the best-known, top-of-the-line product, while manufacturing and health care had the lowest. #4: Some Buyers Are “Price Immune” Price plays an important role in every sales cycle. Since it is a frequent topic during buyer conversations, salespeople can become fixated on the price of their product and believe they have to be lowest. However, decision makers have different propensities to buy, and the importance of price falls into three categories. For “price conscious” buyers, product price is a top decision-making factor. For “price sensitive” buyers, product price is secondary to other decision-making factors such as functionality and vendor capability. For “price immune” buyers, price becomes an issue only when the solution they want is priced far more than the others being considered. Study participants were asked to respond to different pricing scenarios, and their responses were analyzed to categorize their pricing tendency. From a departmental perspective, engineering would be classified as price immune; marketing and sales as price sensitive; and manufacturing, information technology, human resources, and accounting as price conscious. From an industry perspective, only the government sector would be classified as price immune. Banking, technology, and consulting would be price sensitive, while manufacturing, health care, real estate, and fashion are price conscious. #5: It’s Possible to Cut Through Bureaucracy The most feared enemy of salespeople today isn’t solely their archrivals; it’s buyers’ failure to make any decision. This is because every initiative and its associated expenditure is competing against all the other projects that are requesting funds. Do the departments have different abilities to push through their purchases and defeat their company’s bureaucratic tendency not to buy? The answer is yes. Based on the research results, sales, IT, and engineering have more internal clout to push through their projects as opposed to accounting, human resources, and marketing. Therefore they’re better departments to sell into from the salesperson’s perspective. #6: Charisma Sells in Certain Industries Imagine three salespeople who’ve pitched products that are very similar in functionality and price. Which would you rather do business with: A) A professional salesperson who knows their product inside and out but is not necessarily someone you would consider befriending B) A friendly salesperson who is likable and proficient in explaining their product C) A charismatic salesperson who you truly enjoyed being with but is not the most knowledgeable about their product While top selection in every industry was the friendly salesperson, the media and fashion industries selected “charismatic salesperson” more than most, and the manufacturing and health care industries had the highest percentage of “professional salesperson” responses. Many salespeople behave as if buyers are rational decision makers. In reality, human nature is complicated, and a mix of factors — some rational, some not — determine how buyers evaluate sales reps and who they select. Ultimately, it is the mastery of the intangible, intuitive human element of the sales process that separates the winner from losers.