Welcome to the explosion of AI-generated content farms.

And that waste will likely increase exponentially by exploiting programmatic ad placement on AI-generated sites. Generative AI offers a new way to automate the content farm process that can be scaled almost infinitely and in a fraction of the time resulting in what NewsGuard calls “unreliable artificial intelligence–generated news websites.”

Most companies that advertise online automatically bid on spots to run those ads through programmatic advertising. Algorithms place ads on various websites according to complex calculations that optimize the number of eyeballs an ad might attract from the company’s target audience. As a result, big brands pay for ad placements on websites they may have never heard of before, with little to no human oversight. Welcome to the farm. 

NewsGuard recently uncovered nearly 50 junk websites publishing content entirely created by generative AI. It describes the articles as "low quality" and “clickbait," certainly not brand-friendly environments. And certainly not delivering quality eyeballs, and maybe no eyeballs at all.

Many of the sites are simply designed to generate money by showing advertising and affiliate links to readers. Others may have a more nefarious purpose, such as spreading disinformation, conspiracy theories, or propaganda. 

NewsGuard goes on to say, “Developers are using AI chatbots to fill junk websites with AI-generated text that attracts paying advertisers. Over 140 major brands are paying for ads that end up on unreliable AI-written sites, likely without their knowledge. This practice threatens to hasten the arrival of a glitchy, spammy internet that is overrun by AI-generated content, as well as wasting massive amounts of ad money.”

As this problem becomes more widespread, advertisers will likely demand more transparency from ad networks and publishers. They will need to be able to track where their ad dollars are going and ensure that they are well-spent on high-quality content.

Even so, reliability with programmatic advertising is an old problem that has never been solved, and AI is simply throwing fuel on the fire. 

Good luck with that.

Zume Pizza is a cautionary tale, albeit a day late and a dollar short.

Because what they are calling a “Startup Mass Extinction Event” is already happening.  

They were going to make pizza with robots in moving trucks. Who needs to spin dough in the air anyway? 

It was the brainchild of Alex Garden, and Softbank’s Masayoshi Son (the man who gave $3 billion in venture capital to Adam Neumann at WeWork) was hooked. Zume raised $445M from Softbank and other investors, including Yahoo’s Jerry Tang and Kleiner Perkins’ John Doerr, personally. 

By 2019 it was valued at, wait for it… $2.25B! For real. 

Well, the rest of the story seems, in hindsight, predictable. Using robots to make pizzas in trucks while driving around is a dubious ambition, and it proved fatal. An incongruous pivot to producing sustainable packaging is equally hard to grasp

The point here is that what the startup environment is experiencing is like the effects of climate change – dry, unforgiving, and starting to burn. 

Capital is tight, interest rates are high, and the tolerance for lack of cash flow and profitability has evaporated.

It’s been called the potentially worse collapse of the startup space since 2008, and it’s already here. According to research by January Ventures, 81% of early-stage startups stated they only have less than 12 months of runway left. Leading venture capital players are predicting a “mass extinction event” for early- and mid-stage startups that will make the global financial collapse in 2008 “look quaint” by comparison.

The gloomy prediction for the state of the startup sector aligns with a massive drop in global venture financing throughout 2022. According to GlobalData, the value of global VC dropped by 36% in 2022. In 2021, the value of global VC deals was $512.7B compared with $293.8B in 2020.

Analyzing M&A and VC Activity in Q4 2022, GlobalData revealed that VC activity had dropped for a fourth straight quarter in the final quarter of 2022. Global economic slowdown, the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, high inflation rates, rapidly rising interest rates, soaring energy prices, the looming threat of a global recession, and supply chain disruption are cited as reasons behind negative investor sentiment.

"The Mass Extinction Event for startups is underway," said Tom Loverro, general partner at IVP.

Buckle up.

Want to know what consistent focus on your brand and brand values gives you?

Dominance. Wealth. Brand love. Brand fame. Did I say wealth? CEOs need to balance near-term performance with building long-term equity, a mindset that seems lost on many. Every shareholder should demand it or get a new CEO. 

It takes being faithful to a well-defined brand position for the brand’s lifetime. And fulfilling that vision across every product, service, and customer touch point. Strong brands can survive and have financial value long after a business dies.

It takes staying with it, regardless of market condition. It takes being true to the brand. Always.

Want a telegraphic demonstration of the benefits of a strong brand? If these Apple numbers don’t do it, I don’t know what will. 

That kind of brand strength, consistently reinforced by excellent products and superior customer service, has allowed Apple to charge significantly more than its competitors, seamlessly cross-sell products and services, and in fact, encourage customers to embrace and be loyal to an entire ecosystem.

And, importantly, to launch new channels of revenue. Apple services revenue topped $79.4B in 2022 and exceeded $20B in Q1 of 2023.  

This kind of brand power drives loyalty and long-term sustainability. Yes, this is Apple, but all the dynamics hold true for all brands, regardless of size, stage, or category.

Strong brand build wealth. They drive more revenue, and they sell for more.

The requirements? Adopt this thinking as a way of doing business. From day one.

Make it your philosophy. Be consistent. Invest. Maintain. Imbue this in your employees and every constituent. Your brand is your most important asset.

Want to know how to get that done in your company? Hit us up, we can help.

The banking crisis of 2008 took a while to unfold.

In Washington Mutual’s case, customers withdrew $16.7B over ten days. It took only hours, fueled by an instantaneous and real-time Twitter panic that spread among SVB’s customers.

To get a sense of the scale of this run, the bank failures that just hit the U.S. financial system of about $319B are on a very similar scale to those recorded in 2008, of about $373B. The most significant difference was that the run resulted from only two bank failures: Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank. This compares to 2008’s run when 25 commercial banks failed.

The government’s bailout is generating much debate. While depositors are being insured, investors aren’t. Shareholders of the banks will take a serious hit. And the government has said there will be no bailouts like in 2008. But it begs the question if there is a run on more banks, what about the 15 major US banks that hold well over $1 trillion in uninsured deposits? 

It’s good to remember that both SVB and Signature had fewer customers with considerable balances putting them in a precarious position that many traditional banks do not have. Between the two banks, around 90% of their deposits were uninsured.

My grandmother, who lived through the depression, put savings in three or four banks in case of a run and kept cash in books, under that mattress, and in peanut butter jars. That generation always felt a complete lack of trust in the banking system.

What about these days? Is trust eroding again?

She’s only an average gymnast but excels at what the boys want.

And thus, what brands want: eyeballs. And she’s in the money with the NCAA’s new rules on Name, Image, and Likeness (NLI). But there is something that feels fundamentally in conflict, but it’s the way of the world now in amateur college athletics.

Meet Olivia Dunne, who has more followers than Derek Jeter on Instagram and more than Beyonce on TikTok. Dunne has worked with Vuori, American Eagle Outfitters, and a plant-based supplement company called PlantFuel. An autographed trading card with her likeness retails for $89.

Beginning in July 2021, new rules allow college athletes to sign name, image, and likeness deals. This turned on a generation of stars who grew up on social media to cultivate online personas that can be bigger than their profiles as athletes.  

Not everyone likes it. “This is a step back,” Tara VanDerveer, the Stanford women’s basketball coach, told the New York Times about some of the sexy social media content being created by female college athletes. 

But hey, if brands can exploit it, they will exploit it. 

According to data from Opendorse, College athletes earned an estimated $917 million in the first year of Name Image and Likeness (NIL) payments, which began in July 2021.

Three-quarters of NCAA athletes have interacted in some NIL activity since NIL deals began. By May 31, 2022, the average NCAA Division 1 athlete had received $3,711 through NIL, while some big-name players scored high six-figure deals.

Football and men’s basketball account for nearly 67% of NIL compensation (Opendorse), while male athletes lead NIL activities (62.7%) and receive 93% of donor compensation. When eliminating football, the biggest revenue driver in the market, women lead NIL activities by a slim margin.

The whole concept is a polarizing issue. Are the NIL rules for student-athletes right or wrong? Or just a sign of the times?

You tell me.

It’s been a blood bath.

FTX, BlockFI, Three Arrows, Voyager Digital, and Celsius all collapsed in 2022. In addition, the crypto exchange, Coinbase, the largest direct listing in history, took an 86.31% market cap hit in 2022. Mainly due to low signups and a crash in trading volume, the stock was also impacted by the terraUSD/luna crash in May and the spectacular FTX implosion in November. Even golden boy Tom Brady got sucked in and took a serious hit.

And it wasn’t just Coinbase taking a hit. MicroStrategy, the world’s largest corporate holder of bitcoin, is down 70.61%, and Marathon Digital Holdings, one of the largest publicly traded crypto mining firms, fell 89%. Silvergate Capital, a California-based bank that caters almost exclusively to crypto companies, is also down 89%. Coingecko reported that 951 cryptocurrencies were declared dead or failed coins in 2022. With 8000 coins listed in 2021, 40% have failed or were deactivated.

While those who are deep into crypto believe it will bounce back (they speak of a 4-year cycle). But for the general population, it’s a different story. For many, crypto is seen as a scam that got exposed. Confidence and trust have taken a beating, negatively haloing every crypto-related brand. And that’s part of the problem. To build back momentum, it needs the masses to believe and play.  

Crypto needs oversight and regulation to earn back confidence, and it needs it soon. 

Is this an existential problem for crypto? Will this crypto winter see a Spring thaw?

Maybe so, maybe not. 

Just don’t bet the ranch.

Elon just seems to invite controversy.

And as a result, cash flow and hope for profitability are flying out the window. 

Fifty brands reportedly spent nearly $2 billion in advertising on the platform since 2020 and more than $750 million in 2022 as of Nov. 21. Seven other brands have significantly slowed advertising to almost nothing, representing another $255 million of ad spend since 2020. 

Charging a subscription for a blue checkmark isn’t going to fix all that.

General Motors, Chevrolet, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., Ford, Jeep, Kyndryl, Merck & Co., and Novartis AG, among others, all halted Twitter ads or were confirmed as doing so. The others stopped advertising on the platform for a "significant period of time following direct outreach, controversies, and warnings from media buyers."

The issue seems to be a lack of controls, arguments over free speech, and a reported rise in hate speech since controversial accounts were reinstated. Ad placement against disparaging or controversial content is also an issue. 

Content moderation and other control that give advertisers confidence have been fundamentally eliminated. No surprise there, given the layoff of 3700 of its 7500 employees and another reported 1200 resignations. Entire departments have been wiped out. 

Let’s welcome Chris Riedy, a 10-year vet at Twitter, who has ascended to head of ad sales. The guy’s gotta have the hardest job on the planet.

Best of luck.

Tech companies sucked up talent during the pandemic with the fury of the latest Dyson.

Everyone thought the pandemic’s bull run would last forever. Not so. Talent is hitting the street in unprecedented numbers. Meta dropped 11,000 employees. Getir laid off 4,480 people accounting for 14% of their staff. Booking knocked off 25% of its workforce or 4,375 people. And Elon just axed 50% of Twitter’s staff, or around 3,700. Uber, Better.com, Groupon, Peloton, Carvana, Zillow, Stripe, Lyft, Salesforce, and the list goes on. 23,000 tech workers in November alone. Financial firms are set to follow suit.

Sited are all the macroeconomic factors. Inflation, rising interest rates, and the risk of recession pile together to produce smaller corporate profits and agitated investors. But in truth, firms went crazy hoarding talent during the pandemic and over-hiring. Something Mark Zuckerberg apologized for after laying 13% of its workforce. “I made the decision to significantly increase our investments. “Unfortunately, this did not play out the way I expected.”

The truth is, much of the damage was self-inflicted. Soaring profits and the belief that the pandemic’s revenue effect would last forever spelled doom and sparked a drive to find, hire, and hoard the best and most talented. Google and Meta scaled employees at a breathtaking rate. Meta doubled its staff during the pandemic. Along with that came all the incentives, perks, and free meals, all incented with stock options, many of which never even had time to vest.  

And now, we return to reality and the need to manage the P&L. And a significant opportunity for smaller firms to grab tech talent. 

Keep an eye out, Amazon layoffs are next.

For some, it's still a widely contested issue.

Some (like Reed Hastings, Netflix CEO, no surprise there) believe linear TV is in a long and protracted death spiral that’s expected to go on for another 5-10 years. As the recent Nielsen data suggests, the tipping point has already happened. While Netflix has lost subscribers as of late, they are still the dominant player owning 8% of that 34.8%. YouTube is close behind with 7.3%. The rest is spread across hulu, Disney, and all others.

VOD is going to be king, but that does not mean that linear TV is dead. It is still the highest quality medium that just works when you turn it on. And while the classic linear TV channels may be losing to VOD, the brands are here to stay with their own VOD offerings. Brands like FX and NAT Geo have successfully transitioned to the new reality, partnering with hulu and Disney Plus, respectively. 

And for sure, COVID distorted viewability statistics, making it even more difficult to answer if TV is dead. Between the years 2019 and 2020, according to a report by a reported by UK regulatory and competition authority Ofcom, there was a 32% increase in the time people spent daily watching content 2019-2020. Most of that was through the likes of Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Disney+. Interestingly, linear TV also increased’ likely attributed to people defaulting to linear TV for news and updates on the pandemic.

Traditionally TV continues to thrive with live events and sports, and while expensive, advertising on linear TV is still very relevant.

A significant driver for change has been the art phone. Content consumption is no longer centered on the TV. Phones and tablets drive the younger, more desirable demographics, and content providers are adjusting accordingly. 

So in the near term, everything will co-exist. And yes, linear TV may be past its glory days, but it’s not going anywhere for a while.

Where are brands in all this?

What responsibility do brands have in supporting environmentally sustainable recycling efforts? We live in a disposable society trashing technology that is not actually disposable. What did you do with your old iPhone? Many brands have recycling programs, but few, if any, push them.

In some cases, you have to dig to even find mention of them. Is this another case of brands greenwashing with a recycling message without really making an appreciable effort? Is this just another cheap way of satisfying ESG needs driven by shareholders and vacuously trying to satisfy consumer perceptions?  

Maybe so. What we do know for sure is that millions of tons of e-waste are sent to India every year, where men, women, and children risk their health to rip apart old phones, keyboards, TVs, and computers for a screen or a scrap of precious metals. Many more tons go to Hong Kong, Ghana, and West Africa. It is a dangerous calling for people to scavenge for recyclable e-waste, but there is money in it. Recycling 1 million cellphones can recover 20,000 lbs. of copper, 550 lbs. of silver, 50 lbs. of gold, and 20 lbs. of palladium, reducing the damage and pollution done by mining these metals

E-waste must be recycled professionally and carefully discarded in a proper environment with proper safety protocols. Unqualified laborers poison themselves, develop cancer, and damage their nervous systems by digging through mounds of e-waste just to find a screen or a scrap of precious metal. On a global scale, the human and environmental toll of the work is impossible to calculate, but make no mistake, it is significant. And given the unrelenting advancement of technology, not likely to lessen any time soon.

It would seem that a cooperative approach between all electronic manufacturers in a unified and committed recycling effort would make the world a better place. Brands have to take more tangible roles in addressing this crisis, like building on Basel Action Network’s responsible recycling e-waste pledge 

Not a bad return on investment, given the song has not been recorded since 1962

But what’s interesting about this, and not just the iconic longevity of the Dylan brand, is the groundbreaking new ‘Ionic Original’ recording format developed but award-winning record producer and musician T Bone Burnett. The format combines some of the materials used in both vinyl and CDs to create durable, one-of-a-kind analog discs.

As described by WHAT HIFI?, “Unlike traditional vinyl LPs made of PVC, and CDs, which contain plastic with a layer of metal, Ionic Originals will consist of lacquer painted onto an aluminum disc, with a spiral etched into it by music...which can be heard by putting a stylus into the spiral and spinning it.” I think I need a turntable.

Burnett describes the sonically-excellent analog audio output as “the perfect sound.” Burnett’s new company, NeoFidelity, Inc., will handle production and distribution of the new format and hopes to reset the value of recorded music.

If the Christie auction hammer price of Blowin’ In The Wind is any indication, T Bone may be on to something.

Some people just want to be able to hold it.

At a time when the world is hyper-focused on NFTs, collectibles you can’t touch, here comes the reboot of the passion for physical stuff. It’s a return to what people love about collectibles, the ability to have the actual physical object supported by a secure backend. The merging of the physical and digital.

Welcome to the eBay Vault and its digital trading marketplace. The Vault has all the authentication ability and the security of managed transaction history and ownership path, similar to NFTs. But you have an actual thing. The trading platform allows for transactions more akin to NFT trading marketplaces, where investors can track real-time valuation movement and flip a card in what is fundamentally an instant sale. No re-authentication or shipping is required. It’s all in the Vault. eBay provides authenticity guarantees at no cost. Suddenly, trading cards fall into a managed investment category.

From Weiss Schwarts to Harry Potter and Game of Thrones, and of course, every conceivable sport, trading cards are hot. In 2021, Trading Cards merchandise volume (GMV) more than doubled from pre-pandemic levels. In Q1 2022, an average of 2 trading cards were purchased every second on eBay. To date, over 10 million cards purchased on and off eBay were added to customer collections. 

The Vault is a natural. And the beauty? Cards remain secure in the eBay vault, never seeing the light of day. Unless, of course, you want to bring one home. Buying and selling can happen in a digital marketplace that previously was not available for these kinds of collectibles. Anticipating Brady playing another season and his rookie card going up in value? Get one now before he retires.

eBay plans to expand the offering to other collectibles and luxury goods by 2023 and anticipates it will hold $3 billion in assets by 2025 

The digital authentication, ownership, and secure transaction capability alone have massive potential across a huge range of collectibles. 

Hey, got a Zion rookie card? I’d store it here. It’s gonna be worth something.

Unicorns are so 2020.

Today we are talking about decacorns, $10B+ and even hectocorns, at $100B+, the largest of which is Beijing-based Bytedance valued at $140B. Innovation is a global thing and growing, and the numbers are off the charts. Beyond the US and China, which make up 90% of unicorn valuations worldwide, unicorns or bigger can be found in Sweden, Australia, the UK, the Bahamas, India, Indonesia, Turkey, Hong Kong, Germany, Canada, South Korea, Netherlands, France, and Israel to name a few.

While births of new unicorns fell by 15% QoQ to 113, in Q1 of 2022, three were 1070 unicorns, a 62% increase YoY. M&A exits increased for the 7th straight quarter, though IPOs and SPACs we down.

Interestingly, 734 of those unicorns have reached that status in 2021 alone. In the first nine months of 2021, there were 23 early-stage transactions conducted at unicorn valuations, beating 2020's total of 13 deals and 2019's total of 12 financings, according to PitchBook data. 

2021 was a record year with startups raising more capital than any time in history. This year, valuations are expected to come back to earth and based on that, risk allocations will not change. For the venture community, life is good. We’ll see how 2022 fares.

Crypto hacks are not going away.

The numbers are rising exponentially, given the total for the last ten years is approximately $27.47B in losses, 2021 was a big year. And this year is starting out as a doozie. On March 29, the Ronin Network announced the theft of 173,000 ether tokens and 25.5M USD Coin tokens totaling losses of $600M at the time of the announcement. 

The August 2021 heist of the Poly Network to the tune of $610m still holds the dubious top spot. The list of heists worldwide is growing, increasing in frequency, and now averaging $150M, and increasing. What’s clear is that absolute security is simply unattainable.

While some people do get their funds back, many do not. In the 2021 Poly Networks breach totaling $600M, most of the funds were returned, except for a measly $33M. Hackers stated they just wanted to expose security flaws in the network. $200M of the funds were trapped behind a password that “Mr. White Hat” refused to share. Poly Network pleaded with the hacker and promised to grant the unidentified person a $500,000 bounty for helping it identify a flaw in its systems and even offered them a job as “chief security advisor.”

Before the Ronin heist, the Poly heist was the biggest ever, surpassing the $534M stolen from Japanese digital currency exchange Coincheck in 2018 and the estimated $450M worth of bitcoin that went missing from Tokyo-based Mt. Gox in 2014.

You would think the perpetrators are a bunch of tech nerds, but It's not known who is behind many hacks. It’s not necessarily cyber-criminals. State-sponsored hackers were identified as responsible for some crypto heists. According to cryptocurrency researchers at Chainalysis, North Korean hackers stole almost $400m worth of digital assets in at least seven attacks on cryptocurrency platforms last in 2021.

So, better check your wallet.

Sure, Brady’s football legacy is secured.

He is the undeniable GOAT. But his economic impact is significantly more significant than that. Less spoken about is his power to deliver positive economic impact. He is the spokesperson for Aston Martin, UGG, Under Armor, Tag Heuer, Sam Adams, Glaceau Smartwater, and many more. And of course, his brands, TB12, and his performance clothing line, BRADY, all of which contribute.

Brady coming to Tampa Bay and winning a Super Bowl has significant economic impact lifting the Bay area to new heights. Pinellas County Economic Development )PCED) recently reported that, while it is hard to precisely pinpoint the economic impact the Bucs provide to the Tampa Bay area, “it is likely above a hundred million” a year.

According to the PCED report, the Bucs have a team value of $2.94 billion, and Raymond James Stadium boasts net revenues of $364 million. After winning the Super Bowl in February 2021, the Buccaneers team value increased by 29% – even after losing $119 million in stadium revenues for the 2020-21 season due to Covid.

For the ad community, it’s been a boon. The Tampa Bay Times reported Brady’s Tostitos spot had an estimated economic impact of around $200,000, according to the film commission, due to 35 local hires and 60 hotel room nights. And EA Sports spent around $100,000 on a Brady commercial here through 45 local hires and 30 hotel room nights. 

The $19.3M figure does not even include every time he films in his house or the stadium. Nor his documentary Man in the Arena: Tom Brady. 

The guy is a moneymaker, for sure.

But here’s the problem – past access to cheap capital.

After more than a decade of keeping interest rates near zero, the Federal Reserve is pretty much guaranteed to raise rates this year to try to hold back inflation and crush liquidity. Add to that continued supply chain issues, a decimated workforce, and the move to do everything online. And now add the crisis in Ukraine and we have a recipe for, let’s just say, a significant challenge. 

For a decade now, companies have used cheap money, ignoring the fundamentals of cash flow and profitability on the promise of future profits. Given the economic climate today, it’s not hard to imagine that companies using cheap capital to grow rapidly without making a profit will be not be looked upon favorably. These assets no longer look so sexy.

All this could usher in the start of a roaring bear market where investors will feel the pain of cheap-capital economics and deciding not to throw good money after bad. Many businesses may well go out of business. Years of cheap capital fueled dubious ideas with grandiose visions of future performance, think WeWork. Even Robinhood is feeling the pain of avoiding the fundamentals whose value skyrocketed on temporary motivation fueled by get-rich-quick thinking during the pandemic. 

As rates go up, debt gets more expensive, and suddenly, the question of “Can we actually make money?” becomes painfully urgent. You could say it will be a return to the fundamentals. So the days of meme stocks, SPACS with lax oversight, and accepting years of losses, well, those days may well be over. And all these unicorns? Well, they got to get their act together or face extinction.

Boom! This is now about survival.

And that’s not looking promising. We recently posted on the existential threat facing Meta (Facebook), its shift and loss in users, and its push to dominate the metaverse. FB is losing DAUs at quite a significant clip. Users plateaued and began declining in the last three months of 2021, a first in the platform's 18-year history. And the metaverse? FB lost $10B investing in its metaverse endeavors last year alone. Compensating for losses at that rate requires sustained income from advertising on its platforms.

Consider Apple’s privacy settings that are killing FB’s ability to target and the rise of TicTok sucking up users. Together they are strangling Facebook. And Meta is predicting continued decreasing revenue and user numbers. Facebook has said measures taken by Apple on iOS that make it harder for platforms and apps to track users across other apps and websites will cost its business $10 billion in 2022.

This crash puts in question the entire metaverse narrative Meta is pushing. There is no clear path to a sustainable and profitable business model. And while visionaries are replete with a range of income potential, it is still a dream in the foreseeable future. So, where does that leave Facebook/Meta? It’s hard to say. The hard truth is that the metaverse is far from being profitable or replacing the increasingly lost revenue because of competitive platforms or Apple’s policy change.

Interestingly, after announcing Meta’s results, Zuckerberg was quoted, “Although our direction is clear, it seems that our path ahead is not quite perfectly defined.” 

Clearly, they have some work to do.

Better than a dog? Maybe…

We already have technology that can see and hear. Now the ability to smell is getting real traction. A team of scientists led by Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, has invented an artificial olfactory system that can smell the freshness of meat. It’s been tested on commercially packaged chicken, fish, and beef meat samples left to age with surprising accuracy. Maybe a new smartphone app to take to the supermarket?  

Digital scent technology, or e-noses, is a precursor to technology refined to detect bombs, health conditions, including COVID, and even help brew better beer. It has use cases across military and defense, healthcare, food and beverage, machine failure, and waste management. Not surprisingly, military and healthcare applications seem to be the dominant growth drivers.

Air and odor pollution is an increasingly sensitive issue in many parts of the world and is a growing opportunity, for example, in Malaysia back in July 2019, authorities in Malaysia had to dispatch several teams to comb Batang Kali, which was considered to be the source of foul smell which spread through the region. A digital e-nose would have been a big help. 

VCs are throwing serious dollars at it. Aromyx Corp. in Mountain View, CA, recently raised a $10M Series A to develop a digital nose that reacts in the presence of a variety of diseases, including pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and malaria. Stratuscent based in Quebec, raised $500k in seed funding and an exclusive patent license from NASA to develop a technology to “smell” coronavirus in the air. There are countless other techs in development worldwide, so it’s coming.

Do we call it smelltech? Odortech? Scentech has a nice ring to it. Let’s go with scentech… yes?

Can you say, “wealth inequality?" And what about taxing billionaires?

The total wealth of the top 1% now tops 32%, a record, according to the Fed data. U.S. billionaire wealth surged by 70%, or $2.1 Trillion, during the pandemic. AS of October 18, 2021, they are now worth a combined $5 Trillion. 

America’s billionaires have grown $2.1 trillion richer during the pandemic, their collective fortune growing  by 70 percent — from just short of $3 trillion in March 2020, to over $5 trillion as of October 15 of this year, according to Forbes data analyzed by Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) and the Institute for Policy Studies Program on Inequality (IPS).

Not only did the wealth of U.S. billionaires grow, but so did their numbers: in March of 2020, there were 614 Americans with 10-figure bank accounts. Today there are 745.

And none of this addresses the real issue. As quoted in Inequality.org, “The great good fortune of these billionaires over the past 19 months is even starker when contrasted with the devastating impact of coronavirus on working people. Almost 89 million Americans have lost jobs, over 44.9 million have been sickened by the virus, and over 724,000 have died from it.”

Back to the taxing billionaires thing. Consider the fact that Nike head Phil Knight has nearly doubled his fortune from $29.5 billion to almost $58 billion. Nike didn’t pay a dime of federal income taxes in 2020 on its $2.9 billion in profits, and between 2018 and 2020 the corporation paid just a 3.3 percent tax rate on $9 billion in profits. (inequality.org)

Yeah, maybe it’s a good idea. At least let's close a few loopholes.

You can’t see it, but you better believe it.

Brand is an asset. While it is intangible, manage it as you would any asset. It must be maintained and invested in. Commit to building your brand as an asset from the beginning and over time. You will realize better and sustained market performance and higher enterprise value. When it’s time to exit, you will realize a significantly higher transaction multiple.  

The fact is, your brand is the most visible and valuable asset you own, experienced across all points of touch. However, despite being so important, most brands are off balance sheet vs. tangible assets such as plant and equipment, which are far less valuable.

Brands take time to grow value. However, in today’s digitally accelerating world, brand velocity has dramatically increased, allowing brands to grow intangible equity rapidly. And strong brands make money. For example, back in 2008, Brand Master Kevin Keller noted in his book, Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity, that PepsiCo had a tangible book value of $6.5B but had a market cap of over $90B. Keller attributes about $83 billion of that market valuation to intangible assets, and more specifically, to PepsiCo’s brand equity.  

While this is easier to see in the capital markets where the delta between book and cap value is easily seen, it is often invisible for smaller businesses. But you must be a brand believer because the power of brand and its intangible equity provides all the benefits to businesses of all sizes.

Key piece of advice? Make building brand equity a standard operation philosophy, a non-discretionary cost of doing business. Be a brand believer.