Betting the Ranch | STANFORD magazine

Betting the Ranch: Remembering “The Empire Strikes Back” on its 40th Anniversary

Betting the Ranch: Remembering “The Empire Strikes Back” on its 40th Anniversary submitted by antdude to EmpireStrikesBack [link] [comments]

Klobuchar is betting the ranch in 2020

Klobuchar is betting the ranch in 2020 submitted by Rkwdc to PoliticalHumor [link] [comments]

Is Disney "Betting The Ranch" On Next Year's Streaming Service?

submitted by Imared to TheColorIsRed [link] [comments]

Forget the salami...my local deli bets the ranch on one hot new drink.

Forget the salami...my local deli bets the ranch on one hot new drink. submitted by helpinghand350 to nyc [link] [comments]

American Thinker: Senate GOP strategists betting the ranch on Trump

American Thinker: Senate GOP strategists betting the ranch on Trump submitted by thefeedbot to TheBlogFeed [link] [comments]

Don’t bet the ranch on Al

Don’t bet the ranch on Al submitted by ryanr_intl to ufc [link] [comments]

@business: Oil optimists are back. They're just not betting the ranch on a rally yet https://t.co/DziBAv3gvR https://t.co/rDSSzyyr52

@business: Oil optimists are back. They're just not betting the ranch on a rally yet https://t.co/DziBAv3gvR https://t.co/rDSSzyyr52 submitted by -en- to newsbotbot [link] [comments]

@business: Oil optimists are back. They’re just not betting the ranch on a rally yet https://t.co/DziBAvkRUr https://t.co/heqA70mCv7

@business: Oil optimists are back. They’re just not betting the ranch on a rally yet https://t.co/DziBAvkRUr https://t.co/heqA70mCv7 submitted by -en- to newsbotbot [link] [comments]

Inverted yield curve and why I will bet the ranch on bitcoin.

Ok folks lets get real.
The yield curve has inverted and the squeeze is on like never before.
The globalists are trying everything to stop populist movements and they are putting the screws to a cheap money addicted world by raising rates. This drys up cash and hence why commodities and bitcoin are taking a bath. Many people are sitting on dollars as the flight from 'risk on assets' continues.
Thing is they jacked up rates too fast and too much as was predicted by many fundamentalist econ guys. As unrest builds in Europe and soon the USA people will start chanting for the bankers heads to ROLL.. I'm serious.. Last cycle they did this so they could sweep up foreclosed assets and many people didn't know it was by design.. This time many many more people are aware that the international bankers are a den of vipers who created these boom and bust cycles.
As the call for stringing up bankers revs up over the next 2-5 months they will panic and start to ease (lower rates) Unfortunately a liquidity trap will have set in as they waited too long and tightened too far. When they realize lowering rates is not enough it will be FULL ON Q4 (Quant easing 4) Not because the bankers want it but because they realize that for the first time millions see them as deliberately sabotaging nations politically and economically.
This is when first world countries will reach their Venezuela point and we will enter hyper inflation. Gold and Bitcoin will start making daily gains and the race will be on like never before. Since bitcoin is 1.5% of gold's market cap, it will see humongous gains. By late 2019 or early 2020 we could hit $8Trillion in market cap or more.
At some point in late 2020 early 2021 fiat will collapse and we will be using digital currencies 'backed by bitcoin' exclusively. There will be no more fiat exchange. The banks that survive will fill the role of Transaction custodians and lending running things like liquid, LN and side chains. The banks will be the 2nd layer but for the clearing it will all be main chain.
It's just pure math.

submitted by vroomDotClub to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bet the ranch on it

Bet the ranch on it submitted by scantizzy to DanLeBatardShow [link] [comments]

National Perspectives: Betting the Ranch in Southwest Florida

National Perspectives: Betting the Ranch in Southwest Florida submitted by *polhold00477 to nytimes [link] [comments]

Inverted yield curve and why I will bet the ranch on bitcoin. /r/Bitcoin

Inverted yield curve and why I will bet the ranch on bitcoin. /Bitcoin submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Democrats – Lemmings in Search of a Cliff: Why You Shouldn’t Bet the Ranch on 2018

Democrats – Lemmings in Search of a Cliff: Why You Shouldn’t Bet the Ranch on 2018 submitted by chakokat to WayOfTheBern [link] [comments]

Inverted yield curve and why I will bet the ranch on bitcoin. https://t.co/T842blQ7Xr - Crypto Insider Info - Whales's

Posted at: December 6, 2018 at 07:18AM
By:
Inverted yield curve and why I will bet the ranch on bitcoin. https://t.co/T842blQ7Xr
Automate your Trading via Crypto Bot : https://ift.tt/2EU8PEX
Join Telegram Channel for FREE Crypto Bot: Crypto Signal
submitted by cryptotradingbot to cryptobots [link] [comments]

Don't Bet The Ranch

Don't Bet The Ranch submitted by blankcheck123 to Ripple [link] [comments]

US -- La-La-La: NREL bets the ranch on fuel cell electric vehicles http://t.co/ojEeQZsQHw

US -- La-La-La: NREL bets the ranch on fuel cell electric vehicles http://t.co/ojEeQZsQHw submitted by evolvesustain to EvolveSustain [link] [comments]

Only investing what you are willing to lose?

I just saw this advice and I can't help but think this is horrible advice.
Okay yes if you are going to punt on some obscure Mozambique mining stock in the exploration phase, yes probably don't bet the ranch, however, if you are investing in the ASX200 do you honestly expect to lose everything? Especially if you aren't using margin?
If you think buying a house with 10% deposit is not risky but buying the ASX200 with no leverage should be approached with the "Only invest what you are willing to lose" mentality, you probably don't have a fundamental understanding of risk.
Thanks guys, I am here all week.
submitted by aldz1 to ausstocks [link] [comments]

What would you do with your 5%?

If you're unfamiliar with John Bogle, he founded Vanguard and was the first person to commercialize index funds so common investors could buy them.
I consider myself a Boglehead, and I'm using the Lazy Portfolio--a.k.a. a diversified mix of index funds--for 100% of my investing.
But one of Bogle's pieces of advice has been rattling in my head recently. He often said (paraphrasing slightly), "If you really feel the need to test yourself, take no more than 5% of your nest egg and invest it however you choose."
I'm reading some of Ben Graham's books (that inspired Warren Buffett) and think it'd be fun to take a small percentage of my investments and try out value investing. Fun, but not something I'd ever bet the ranch on.
What would you do with your 5%? Individual stocks. Options. Commodities. Crypto (?!).
submitted by BestInterestDotBlog to FinancialPlanning [link] [comments]

/u/pbar on Does the Left simply want to liberate us from work?

Dam I put way too much work into that.
I appreciate the effort.
Capitalism itself concentrates wealth, or "moves it up." There is a big fat economics book by a guy named Piketty which I have not read, but as I understand it, he "proves" that this is inevitable, although of course a proof in econ is not like a proof in mathematics.
The problem is that his cure is worse that the disease. He proposes...as I understand it...to confiscate everyone's wealth periodically and hit the reset button. (If anyone has read Piketty, can you chime and and tell me if I'm full of it?)
This goes to what critics of socialism call "the motivation problem": why am I going to work to build up a great enterprise if you're just going to take it away and give it to others?
As far as assistance creating more needy people, I didn't think that was even in dispute. It makes sense in theory, and I see it every day as someone who owns a few rental properties occupied by sec 8 tenants....each of whom has more kids than I could afford to have...and in several cases those kids are also in sec 8 houses...and their own kids soon will be. As I said, the Romans argued about this problem, and we are still arguing about it, so I don't think it is illusory.
doesn't create wealth it moves it up. The problem is that It sits at the top and stays there
I don't think you're right about this, hoss, and I didn't say that. Rockefeller's "greed", his desire to dominate his industry, lead him to constantly innovate. refining processes, pipelines, etc etc. And the result of all this was that the price of kerosene plummeted from 26 cents a gallon to 8 cents, and in an era when a working man made, what, a dollar a day, that was a huge blessing, broadly distributed. Yes, Rockefeller got filthy rich. If he had been less competitive, his rivals would have done better, but he couldn't have driven the price for his products down like he did without massive consolidation of the industry. (Read "Titan", Ron Chernow's biography of JDR).
JDR also looked for new ways to use petroleum, and so was tied into the development of the infant auto industry. By sucking oil out of the ground, refining it more efficiently and cheaply than anyone else, and seeing its potential for new uses, I would say he created massive wealth, the benefits of which were widely distributed.
I don't like to come across as being in favor of kicking babies, but every penny that could have been taxed away from Rockefeller and given to some unproven startup oil refiner, would have a very high probability of being wasted.
As far as big companies avoiding taxes, yes, it sounds bad, but don't they do this by reinvesting, growing, creating, we hope, more jobs, more wealth? I personally think corporate taxes should be abolished, because they are paid by you, the consumer, in the end. Corporate earnings that are distributed to shareholders are taxed, wages paid are taxed, and corporate profits that aren't reinvested are taxed, already.
If you ever actually look at the barriers they are removing, you will notice that these barriers aren't holding back small businesses, but were there for the people's protection.
Now as an owner of a small business, who knows many other owners of small businesses, I can tell you: It may be true that regulations are there for people's protection...or at least that is there stated intent...but they absolutely do impede small businesses, who don't have the cash to deal with them the way bigger businesses do.
Yeah everyone loves cheap stuff, but now Ma and Pa. are out of business because they can't compete at a profit of one cent per an item sold or less. Ultimately, the same number of people in the community are hired but Dollar store pays them all less.
And everyone else in the community gets their stuff cheaper. Which is good. Progressives hate WalMart, but small town and country people love the place, because there's a lot of stuff under one roof and it's cheap. Yes, Clem's market goes out of business, but WalMart pays more than Clem did, and sells a lot cheaper, because of scale and efficiency. It sucks for Clem, but it works for most of the rest. Clem will have to open up a bait shop, or find some niche that WalMart doesn't want to bother with.
Competition isn't bad, Big companies pushing little guys out is. We can build more competition by taxing the top and sending it to the bottom to let new people raise it up and create competition. Thus, making more jobs and a better economy.
I mean, it sounds good, and I don't totally disagree. What you don't seem to understand is that there is already constant churning among companies. WalMart dominates its market today, but do you even remember who did thirty years ago? Sears, maybe? Where are they now? New companies are constantly coming along with better ideas, and displacing old ones. I would bet the ranch that in 30 years, WalMart will be only a memory.
I just question the specifics, the details, of your idea. Taxing the people on the top and sending their money to people on the bottom to build new businesses...how, exactly? Do you trust government to have the smarts to identify the best new ideas, the ones that really have a chance to survive and grow? I don't. And in fact, if you have a truly new idea, something that might really change the game, you will likely be able to find private investors who will be delighted to hand their money over to you. I trust their judgement a lot more. You know why? Because it's their own money they are turning over, not someone else's.
TLDR: Yes, but also no.
from pbar on Does the Left simply want to liberate us from work?
submitted by rightwingnews to DebateRightists [link] [comments]

I bet you can't spell out the lyrics to ram ranch

submitted by derp_status to AskOuija [link] [comments]

ATHX Yahoo Message Board Archives: the u/blast22 collection

About 6 months ago u/blast22 offered to share notes from old Yahoo board in a reddit post titled: fao dalek kelad re. old Yahoo Board records. I took up this offer and was able to quickly obtain the files but it took me a long while to find time to post them on the web. Apologies for the delay for those who expressed interest in this treasure trove like u/jcando12
But alas here it is: ATHX Message Board Yahoo Archives: the u/blast22 collection
It must have taken a really long time to pick the best posts and aggregate all this information into documents so thank you again u/blast22 it is truly appreciated.
Most of the posts are from 2015/2016 but they are all dated and titled methodically. It is hundreds of pages all on one site page, so if you want to search on a topic use the browser search (Ctrl+F) not the blog search function. For example with recent conversations around Humira, I searched Humira and found many nuggets below:
________
MULTISTEM COMPARES FAVORABLY TO BLOCKBUSTER DRUGS
by science_based • 24 February 2016
A tantalizing post by Dave Sunderhaft (@dsunderhaft) on Twitter today:
“1/2 – To put new 1 yr $athx results in context, top 3 meds today, Humira, Enbrel, Remicade earn $28B/yr and only work for 40% …
2/2 Stroke is a larger market and $athx multistem worked in more than 40% including 29% with a full recovery.”
Anyone able to verify?
_________
Multistem should replace Humira, currently worlds best selling drug – $12.5 billion revenue in 2014
by dalek_kelad • 3 March 2016
When it comes to Multistem, chronic inflammation is not off the table. In fact findings of recent stroke trial and preclinical research show that Multistem could eventually replace certain monoclonal antibodies, which are laboratory produced substances that can locate and bind to specific molecules, such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF). This is HUGE business. Humira is one such TNFa blocker that targets RA, UC, PA, Chrohn’s among many other conditions. In 2014 it had revenue of $12.5 billion and is curently the ‘world’s best selling drug’ according to IMS Health. The main advantage that Multistem has is that while also serving as an anti TNF agent, Mulitstem data show a reduction in secondary infections while Humira has the opposite side effect including serious sometimes fatal blood disorders and infections, including TB, lymphoma, tissue cancers, liver injury, etc and is why current TNF blockers have an FDA-issued black box warning. Multistem on the other hand has a body of preclinical research showing a consistent reduction of inflammatory cytokines and an increase in anti-inflammatory cytokines. In a preclinical study by UTHealth “1b and TNF-a levels in the media were significantly reduced in the MultiStem treated group compared with vehicle control and IL-10 levels significantly increased. (p less than 0.05)”. We also know from the GVB interview with WST that Multistem “substantially reduced levels of multiple inflammatory cytokines, including IL-6, IL-12, TNFa and others. Furthermore results suggest these effects are more pronounced for subjects receiving MultiStem administration within 36 hours.” Regarding the UC trial, we only need to look at the dosing regimine of Humira to understand why it did not meet endpoints. Humira involves high, frequent dosage early on then weekly dosing for up to years. No wonder Multistem showed an effect after 4 weeks but didn’t show lasting effects with just a single dose. Needless to say the pipeline will be strong for decades
________
No Big Pharma Partners
by alfuture1 • 20 March 2016
I do not see Athersys partnering with any big Pharma companies, especially in the US. Here’s why:
  1. There is a major trust factor. ATHX has many indications that will compete against big Pharma pipelines: Ex: Multistem vs Humira. Gil knows they will try to prevent Multistem from reaching the market. Look at the absurd response from Chugai and how they wanted to advance Multistem, by bypassing Japan and having Athx pay for a US trial first.
  2. ....
________
survtech10 ( u/survtech) • 21 March 2016
On that note, I firmly believe that some form of stem cell treatments will one day replace many of BP’s most cherished (and profitable) drugs. Xeljanz and Humira, among others, are gold mines for their manufacturers. The estimated cost of Xeljanz, dosing at the typical 5mg tablet twice a day is $20,000 to $40,000 per year. Humira, Enbrel and the rest of the biologics cost out in the same area.
And none of them, NOT ONE, cures arthritis. At best, they reduce the symptoms and progression of the disease so potentially, patients (insurance) would have to pay out huge sums for many years, along with accepting the continuing possibility of suffering severe, even fatal, side effects. Not an ideal solution…
________
Inflamatory Bowel Disease and GvHD
by ajstaggs01 •
junkdna50 • 18 April 2016
I just looked up the trial conditions for using Humira against UC. The P2 trials were multiple doses over a year. We know Multistem does not persist and does not act as a permanent patch so It had no chance. I don’t think it was a conspiracy. Pfizer is just messed up.
________
nflamatory Bowel Disease and GvHD
by ajstaggs01 •
survtech10 • 18 April 2016
Humira (adalimumab) from AbbVie and Xeljanz (tofacitinib) from Pfizer are very similar. Although they work via separate mechanisms (Humira works on Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF)) while Xeljanz is a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor. Both drugs started out treating Rheumatoid Arthritis and have been expanded by their prospective manufacturers to treat other auto-immune diseases. Humira for Crohn’s Disease, Psoriasis, Psoriatic Arthritis and other forms of Arthritis and Xeljanz for Psoriasis, Ulcerative Colitis, other forms of Arthritis and Hair Loss.
One big difference between the two is the method of treatment. Xeljanz comes in pill form while Humira is injectable. I know someone who takes Humira. An injection every two weeks is not bad, just not something I really want to do to myself. A huge similarity between the two drugs is the list of potential side effects, some life-threatening. The primary concern for both is the potential to acquire dangerous infections like TB.
So far, stem cells have shown zero side effects. I tend to believe stem cell treatments will eventually replace many “traditional” drugs with better efficacy and zero adverse events.
_________
Interview with Athersys CEO
[–]markifeldman 6 October 2016
on re-reading the interview…there is one matter i would like to pursue further…. the colitis test. we are now betting the ranch on single dosage administration of the drug in acute medical events…MI and stroke. using the med for a single dosage for an acute medical condition is the application we are pursuing after seeing failure in single dosage for chronic disease( colitis, crohns, etc). Colitis and crohns are now currently treated with continuous, repeated infusions of Remicade and Humira. They are not ” one and done” therapies. They are also extraordianarily espensive when done in MD s office and generally performed in four to six week intervals creating enormous expense and inconvenience. For those of you not familiar with remicade … the drug was made by Centocor then sold to J and J. That one drug made tens of billions for them and is still performing as there has not been an acceptable replacement brought to market.If/when athersys has the time/resources/ personnel to do a better designed study they may find that a several application therapy over a specified period of time may produce the results they are looking for with far fewer side effects for patients .This would be an enormous breakthrough and be welcome by insurers as those patients currently being treated by today’s standards are a huge ongoing PERMANENT expense. I am sure this is on the back burner now but in my opinion it warrants further investigation with a better designed and better run study. Lets get the stuff approved then chase all of the additional applications. just some thoughts…..i have an autoimmune doc friend of mine who has made millions doing the infusions of remicade ( for RA, crohns, etc) the past decade.
Interview with Athersys CEO
[–]dalek_kelad 7 October 2016
I completely agree that when it comes to Multistem, chronic inflammation is not off the table. In fact findings of recent stroke trial and preclinical research show that Multistem could eventually replace certain monoclonal antibodies, which are laboratory produced substances that can locate and bind to specific molecules, such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF). This is HUGE business. Humira is one such TNFa blocker that targets RA, UC, PA, Chrohn’s among many other conditions. In 2014 it had revenue of $12.5 billion and is curently the ‘world’s best selling drug’ according to IMS Health. The main advantage that Multistem has is that while also serving as an anti TNF agent, Mulitstem data show a reduction in secondary infections while Humira has the opposite side effect including serious sometimes fatal blood disorders and infections, including TB, lymphoma, tissue cancers, liver injury, etc and is why current TNF blockers have an FDA-issued black box warning. Multistem on the other hand has a body of preclinical research showing a consistent reduction of inflammatory cytokines and an increase in anti-inflammatory cytokines. In a preclinical study by UTHealth “1b and TNF-a levels in the media were significantly reduced in the MultiStem treated group compared with vehicle control and IL-10 levels significantly increased. (p less than 0.05)”. We also know from the GVB interview with WST that Multistem “substantially reduced levels of multiple inflammatory cytokines, including IL-6, IL-12, TNFa and others. Furthermore results suggest these effects are more pronounced for subjects receiving MultiStem administration within 36 hours.” Regarding the UC trial, we only need to look at the dosing regimine of Humira to understand why it did not meet endpoints. Humira involves high, frequent dosage early on then weekly dosing for up to years. No wonder Multistem showed an effect after 4 weeks but didn’t show lasting effects with just a single dose. Needless to say the pipeline will be strong for decades

Interview with Athersys CEO
[–]markifeldman 7 October 2016
your points are extremely well thought out. Multistem is anti- inflammatory and will quite possibly have numerous applications outisde of the indications we are currently testing it for. Unfortunately, conducting all of these studies is way outside the realm of feasibility for a company the size of athx at this time. I look for long term usage in many autoimmune diseases…RA, Lupus, scleroderma, crohns, etc. We must first have a marketable product producing revenue that would allow the future R and D. Also…one would be fighting the drug giants that market Humira,Remicade, etc. That is some task. On the flip side…. it could make us a great target at a great price for one of the big boys who have the critical mass to do all of this stuff.
_________
Sweet tweet Athersys
[–]survtech 3 November 2016
Again, it wasn't Athersys' trial. Stop blaming Gil. He got what he wanted: $6 million upfront cash, while Pfizer got to play with stem cells to see if a couple of low doses of stem cells could compete with Xeljanz.
Of note, at the time of the UC trial, it cost $15 per million cells to expand MultiStem so a proposed course of treatment would be 2x 750 million cells ($11,250 x2 = $22,500) plus markups, etc. In the case of Xeljanz for UC, dosing would likely be two 5mg tablets per day for at least a year, if approved treatment follows the clinical trial. Xeljanz costs about $3,500 for 60 tablets (30 day supply) making total cost 12 x $3,500 or $42,000. That's probably basically comparable to what MultiStem would have eventually cost using Terumo's Quantum Cell Expansion System.
The thing is, Pfizer is still having problems getting the FDA to approve Xeljanz in the way Pfizer wants it to be prescribed. The FDA didn't approve it for psoriasis and also nixed 10mg doses for arthritis.
I think Pfizer knew drugs like Xeljanz and Humira are dangerous and they were looking for something safer. It's obvious MultiStem has an excellent safety profile but it appears to be unlikely it works on chronic conditions.
submitted by dalek_kelad to ATHX [link] [comments]

Is now the time to invest/diversify in precious metals?

I've always read that precious metals are a notoriously bad investment. They barely track to inflation. However, a couple of my semi-savvy, investor friends are considering it. We all know the recession will come eventually. The fed is planning to cut rates which means fixed income will yield very little. This would be a diversification play NOT a bet-the-ranch. What do you think?
submitted by It-just-is to investing [link] [comments]

GOING CRAZY BETTING $6 A SPIN AT THE CASINO Betting with the Bag Moves to ODDSHQ The End...For Now Mere and I Gambled.....and WON BIG!!! AL West Baseball Betting Preview for the 2020 MLB Season

Betting the Ranch Newland navigates the personal side of developing privately owned land in Tampa. By Lisa Jackson. FOR FOUR GENERATIONS, S.C. (Bud) Bexley and his family have lived on and worked King Ranch Inc is betting its future on areas unrelated to cattle, from leasing land to quail hunters to lending ranch's name to line of luxurious pickup trucks; challenges facing ranch include Betting the Ranch: Remembering “The Empire Strikes Back” on its 40th Anniversary. May 21, 2020 - 2:00 pm. Bottom of the Barrel: Remembering “The Man with the Golden Gun” on its 45th Anniversary. Mar 18, 2020 - 8:26 pm. Defection or World War III?: Remembering “The Hunt for Red October” on its 30th Anniversary Betting the Ranch. By Gordon Mott, Marvin R. Shanken | From Steve Wynn, Jan/Feb 03. Share. Share. Steve Wynn will always be associated with the revival of Las Vegas. When the city was being written off in the late 1980s as a stale, out-of-date locale, Wynn came along and created luxurious, upscale casino-resorts that transformed the city. Betting the Ranch: Risking Your Home to Buy Securities When the stock market is rising and mortgage interest rates are low, some investors may be tempted to take out new mortgages, refinance, or obtain lines of credit secured by their homes for the specific purpose of investing in securities.

[index] [12366] [12779] [7604] [11080] [10674] [8800] [3647] [4865] [6229] [12596]

GOING CRAZY BETTING $6 A SPIN AT THE CASINO

Outrageous $1000 Spin Max Bet High Limit Slot Play - The Big Jackpot - Duration: 1:58:46. The Big Jackpot 1,009,694 views. 1:58:46 🔴 $1,000 PER SPIN Live In Las Vegas 💵 We’re DOING IT AGAIN! Our Wyoming Life features our Wyoming ranch and our ranch family. Giving you a look into the workings of ranching from raising cattle to raising and harvesting crops. Erin will join you weekly out ... Go to https://buyraycon.com/offtheranch for 15% off your order! Brought to you by Raycon Thanks so much for all the love and support guys!!! Grab a shirt/hoo... The Odds.Com partnership with Betting with the Bag continues to grow! Now you get all your Jimmy the Bag content on the OddsHQ YouTube page. The family works together to plant more seeds in their lower garden. If you would like to show appreciate for the videos produced by Out of Goshen, you are welcome to make a donation. It is ...