Crowdfunding – investment method of the future?

by Leave a Comment

The advent of the internet allowed, for the first time, a more participatory, two-way form of communication. In the past, corporations and media companies broadcasted messages for the public to digest without offering a truly significant out for feedback save for letters to the editor. The internet however, created a collaborative platform in which not one single entity controlled the message. Users from around the world for the first time could engage in discussion and share ideas.

It is unsurprising, then, that the disruption of the model of communication would be echoed in the disruption of the traditional ways an entrepreneur would seek funding. While in the past entrepreneurs and hopeful business owners would have to rely on investors, loans or their own money, the emergence of the internet has allowed for a fairly new form of funding: crowdfunding.

According to Investopedia, crowdfunding is defined as “the use of small amounts to capital from a large number of individuals in finance a new business venture.” Social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn and crowdfunding work in perfect tandem to attract as many investors as possible for the business venture.

There are two main models of crowdfunding: donation-based and investment crowdfunding. As the name suggests, with donation-based crowdfunding, funders willingly donate money towards some collaborative goal. More often than not, these funders will receive some sort of reward based on how much money they donate. For example, in the case of funding a new album for a band, a funder may receive a CD for donating $10, or a private concert for donating $10,000.

Investment crowdfunding is different in the sense that funders will gain a portion of the business in form of stocks, equity or debt in return for their investment. In this model, funders have the opportunity to make money off their investment as opposed to the donation-based model, where funders will only receive a product or service (similar to pre-ordering an item.)

Research conducted by Massolution, an association dedicated to researching crowdsourcing and crowdfunding, showed that “crowdfunding platforms raised $2.7 billion and successfully funded more than 1 million campaigns in 2012.” Forecasts see these numbers increasing dramatically over the next few years as the successes of crowd-sourced projects continue to catch the public’s and potential business owners’ interests.

Crowdfunding offers many advantages over traditional forms of investment. First of all, it greatly benefits small businesses which lack the cash or resources in order to grow. When seeking funding for a project, the business sets a time limit (varying from a few weeks to a few months) and a target goal. Furthermore, details of the product are made available to the public, and the business’ financial records are made more transparent. Funders are also able to see the progress a business is making towards achieving that goal. Funders can be as involved as they like in the process by tracking progress, asking questions and offering suggestions. This creates a closer bond between the funder and the project owner, which creates a greater sense of loyalty and a better chance of retaining the funder as a potential customer.

There are various different crowdsourcing platforms available, but the most popular and most successful websites are Kickstarter, Indiegogo, and Crowdfunder. There are also more industry-specific crowdfunding websites such as Pledgemusic, which allows fans to contribute money towards their favourite artist to help them fund their next album or music endeavours.

 

Kickstarter, the biggest crowdfunding platform, was founded in 2009. In 2013 alone, 3 million people pledged $480 million to Kickstarter projects. 19,911 projects were successfully funded, resulting in the development of those products or services that were offered.

There are many projects which have become famous and popular in their own right after being funded on Kickstarter. Pebble – a customizable smartwatch which can connect to one’s iPhone or Android phone – is one of the most successful projects successfully funded by Kickstarter. The project attracted 68,929 backers and raised $10,266,845 out of the $100,000 goal it set. While the project is no longer open on Kickstarter, its enormous success allowed it to grow as a business and offer new and updated models from their website.

What made Kickstarter such an effective and popular platform was its unique business model. Kickstarter adopted an “all or nothing” approach. A project must achieve 100% of its funding goal in order to receive the funds. If a project is unable to reach the goal, the funds are returned to the backers. For every successful project, Kickstarter receives 5% commission. This means that with just the Pebble project alone, Kickstarter received $513,342.25 by simply hosting the project on their website. If the product is distributed on Amazon, Amazon will also take a commission of 2%.

However, Kickstarter – and crowdfunding – has its downsides as well. One of the general misconceptions of crowdfunding is that it is an easier way of obtaining funds. However, backers need to have faith in the product or service that is being offered – their ‘donation’ is essentially a vote of confidence. This means that one can’t just have an idea and post it on Kickstarter – they need to have already invested some of their own money in creating a prototype, videos and pictures to show the public. There is a risk on the backer’s side too: by pledging an amount of money, the backer is risking receiving a delayed, faulty, and/or low quality product that may not reach their expectations.

A committed community is also essential in order to reach the required number of backers. Due to Kickstarter’s “all or nothing” business model, it is imperative that a project receives at least 100% of their goal – else their efforts will have gone to waste. Kickstarter is also purely online. It is difficult to translate the efforts to raise money offline, and offline donations do not count towards the Kickstarter goal.

Overall, crowdfunding opens up many opportunities to small businesses that may not have otherwise been able to raise fund, and generates interest in creative and unique ideas. Crowdfunding, when done correctly, can clearly encourage entrepreneurship and innovation. With any investment, however, there is a risk in something not living up to one’s expectations. One also needs to keep in mind that the more investors, the more people one needs to please.

Additional sources:

Homepage

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/crowdfunding.asp

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chancebarnett/2013/05/08/top-10-crowdfunding-sites-for-fundraising/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/geristengel/2014/05/07/crowdfunding-is-more-than-just-the-money-it-helps-you-raise/

https://www.kickstarter.com/year/2013/?ref=footer#6-pebble

http://www.forbes.com/sites/suwcharmananderson/2012/11/30/kickstarter-dream-maker-or-promise-breaker/

 

 

 

The Miracle of Corn

by Leave a Comment

Ask the average, everyday American what they think the most important agricultural product the US produces and you might get several answers. Beef, perhaps, given due to the dominance of McDonalds in this country. Soybeans or cotton are also two fair guesses. (Ask the question in California, and you might even get the avocado as your answer.)

What many people don’t realise is that while the aforementioned products are important, their significance in the economy, in politics and indeed this very society pales in comparison to corn. Corn is the most produced crop in the US, with 84 million acres being dedicated to the harvesting of corn. The cash receipts from sales of corn alone amount to $63.9 billion per year. Indeed, the US produces about 34% of the world’s total corn, by far the largest corn producer and consumer of the world.

corn1

Corn almost literally makes the world go round – at least, in the case of the US. There are about 4,200 uses for corn. For the large part, corn is found in many food products, some medicine, starch, and alcohol. However, corn is also used in the production of plastic, glue, oil, and ethanol – a source of energy. Most of the nation’s livestock is also fed with corn which, in theory, drives down the prices of meat for the American consumer.

It is hardly a coincidence that the US is also the world’s “largest consumer of sweeteners, including high-fructose corn syrup.” High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is just one of many uses of corn, and is found in an astoundingly wide array of foods in the US. Here is a list of 10 items that contains HFCS that you may or may not have expected:

  1. Yogurts
  2. Breads
  3. Frozen pizzas
  4. Cereal bars
  5. Cocktail peanuts
  6. Boxed macaroni and cheese
  7. Salad Dressing
  8. Tonic
  9. Applesauce
  10. Canned Fruit

The average American eats 35 pounds of high-fructose corn syrup per year. What is even more alarming is that medical studies have shown that HFCS – especially when consumed in such large quantities – is extremely hazardous to one’s health. First of all, excess consumption of sugar in any form is a leading cause for diabetes and obesity. Due to government farm bill corn subsidies, HFCS can be used as a cheaper, sweater substitute to cane sugar, increasing its presence in food products and therefore our daily intake of sugar.

corn2 corn3

 

(http://www.cornnaturally.com/economics-of-hfcs/)

Furthermore, despite what corn lobbyists may say, cane sugar and HFCS are not treated in the same way by our bodies. According to the Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Institute, “free fructose from HFCS requires more energy to be absorbed, and soaks up two phosphorous molecules from ATP. This depletes the energy fuel source in our gut required to maintain the integrity of our intestinal lining.” Despite the medical evidence, HFCS continues to be an integral part of our diet – whether we like it or not – due to the high tariffs the US places on imported sugar and the generous subsidies they grant the corn industry.

Corn clearly is an important part of the American economy – but at what price? There are some who argue that relying so heavily on one crop is dangerous; that America should expand and diversify its economy for security and practical reasons. However, the corn’s industry’s hold on US politics, governments, and decision making is strong.

An article by the Washington Post illustrated some examples that the corn industry influences society around us. Researcher and a Harvard-trained cardiologist who runs the Rippe Lifestyle Institute presented “30 peer-reviewed studies showing that there is no nutritional difference between sugar and corn syrup.” His research is not only funded by corn refiners, but he also personally receives a “consulting fee of $500,000 a year from the corn refiners.”

Furthermore, a non-profit group, the Center for Consumer Freedom, launched a television, newspaper and online campaign to defend corn syrup safety. The $3.2 million that funded the non-profit organization came from the corn refiners.

The influence the corn industry has on American politics most clearly manifests itself in the Presidential elections. The Iowa caucuses have historically been extremely important in the nominating process for the President of the United States. Since 1972, Iowa has been the first major electoral event, and serves as an early indication of which candidates will be successful in receiving the nomination of their political party in order to run for presidency.  Ethanol production consumes about 1/3 of Iowa’s corn production. Historically, presidential nominees have to support the ethanol production industry in order to win Iowa – and therefore even stand a chance of winning the election.

Whether we realise it or not, corn is around us. Who knew such a simple crop would have such a significant impact on our meals but the very economy, society and political environment we live in?

 

Additional Sources:

http://www.mercola.com/Downloads/bonus/danger-of-corn-syrup/report.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/corn-syrup-foods-high-fructose-_n_1854790.html

http://www.economist.com/node/21562912

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032301625_2.html

http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/corn/trade.aspx#.U2tEyvmICSo

http://www.economist.com/node/16220592

 

The struggle against textbook prices

by Leave a Comment

It is no surprise that the price of college tuition has increased dramatically over the last few years. With the Great Recession, many public colleges suffered from a severe cut in funding from their respective states. Prices were hiked, followed quickly by a rise in tuition in private colleges. Unfortunately, however, tuition prices are just the first thing that students have to worry about. Other college related expenses – housing, food, and transportation for example – have also seen drastic increases in prices. What is most alarming, however, is the dramatic increase in textbook prices.

Technological advancements in the last decade have allowed for new ways for students to obtain textbooks such as the advent of e-books, online retailers, textbook rental services, and free textbook databases. Furthermore, there have been initiatives taken by the government on both the state and federal level to combat textbook prices such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Despite all of this, however, textbook prices continue to rise. What is the main cause for increasing textbook prices? What sort of disruptions – if any – is the textbook industry seeing, and how is that affecting them?

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE TEXTBOOK INDUSTRY

 1

Historically, textbooks in the US have been high – and prices of textbooks have only risen over the last 30 years. According to a study conducted by The American Enterprise Institute’s Mark Perry, the prices of college textbooks in 2013 have increased 812% since 1977. (In comparison, the Consumer Price Index – a standard measure for inflation – has increased by 250%). In fact, the rate at which textbook prices have increased is higher than all other expenses related to college – including college tuition. The Bureau of Labour Statistics reported that from 2006 to 2011, the cost of textbooks increased by 38.6% while the cost of tuition had increased by 32.2%.

2

 

 

Rising textbook prices – along with rising tuition costs – have long been a concern. According to the National Association of College Stores (NACS), students spent an average of $370 on course materials during the fall 2013 term. Furthermore, “40.6% of students said they usually pay for course materials with grants, scholarships and student loans during the fall 2013 term. Financial assistance covered, on average, 57% of the costs of the course materials for those students.”

However, in a survey conducted by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, “7/10 students stated that they had not purchased a textbook at least once because the price was too high.” A significant percentage of students receive financial aid or student loans – however it is evident that this aid is not nearly adequate enough to cover the full cost of college – both tuition and textbooks. The gap between the cost of textbooks and the amount of aid a student receives and subsequently, their ability to afford the textbooks is steadily increasing.

BREAKDOWN OF A COLLEGE TEXTBOOK: WHERE IS YOUR MONEY GOING?

3

There are several reasons that help explain the expensive nature of textbooks. First of all, printing and publishing any book is a hugely expensive process. Textbooks require many additional costs compared to a novel, for example. Textbooks deal with highly specialized material. The content of any textbook is often the result of extensive academic research that also needs to be constantly updated in subsequent editions. Furthermore, many textbooks have multiple authors – all of whom the publisher needs to pay a copyright fee to. This fee is increased exponentially in textbooks like literature anthologies which contain the works of dozens of different authors.

Textbooks also often come with supplementary materials – online-access codes, DVDs, or subscriptions – the costs of which are bundled in the cost of the book itself. Furthermore, traditional brick-and-mortar bookstores (such as the ever-present college bookstore) can be expensive to run. Rent, utilities, shipping in the supplies and salaries are just a few of the costs that bookstore owners have to worry about. It is no surprise that these costs often trickle down for the consumer to pay in the form of a more expensive textbook.

NACS reported that, on average, new textbooks in college bookstores are sold with a margin of 21.1% (the average difference between the cost price and the retail price of a textbook) After all expenses have been paid, “a college store makes less than 4 cents on every dollar’s worth of new textbooks sold.” For the majority of cases, this money goes back to the school in order to pay for financial aid, scholarships, and student programs.

If the profit margins for college bookstores are so small, then it clearly must be the publishers or the authors who are reaping the benefits of soaring textbook prices. The textbook industry is highly oligopolistic in nature. As mentioned previously, the subject material in textbooks are highly specialized and require extensive research; as a result, there are substantially fewer options when choosing a textbook in a specific field of study as opposed to a novel of a particular genre. Furthermore, there are often no alternatives offered to a textbook which is assigned for a class – the student may opt out of buying a book but at the cost of their grades: Nicole Allen, program director for the Scholarly Publishing Academic Resources Coalition, an alliance of academic libraries noted that “Publishers have been able to drive up textbook prices because students “have to buy whatever textbook they’ve been assigned.” As is the case with any other scarce good, when demand exceeds supply, the prices of the good increases.

5 4

 

The actual textbook industry is dominated heavily by just a few players. According to a report conducted by the Council of Economic Advisers at the Whitehouse, there are just three companies which almost completely control the textbook publishing industry: Pearson, McGraw Hill, and Houghton-Mifflin. Between the three companies (including smaller companies that they own), they control over 85% of the textbook market. In 2013, for example, Pearson reported £5,690 million in sales and £736 million in adjusted operating profits. The North American Education division was responsible for the vast majority of these figures. In sales, the North American Education division reported £2,779 million, and in profits £406 million – accounting for 55% of Pearson’s overall profits. In addition, McGraw-Hill’s profit margin was 25% in 2012.

6

Despite these impressive figures, these companies are actually showing some struggles in maintaining – let alone improving – profits in the educational sector. In February 2014, The Wall Street Journal reported that Pearson “issued a profit warning amid continuing weakness in its core U.S. education business.” The metric for North American education “fell 24%.”

According to Chief Executive John Fallon, “Our biggest business, North America, is facing the most difficult trading conditions in a decade.” The company blamed the tumultuous education sector in the U.S. as well as the “short but difficult transition” its business faced as it transitioned from print to digital.

Clearly, traditional textbook publishing companies are feeling pressure from the new technological age and various alternative methods of textbooks. But what are these alternate methods, and how popular are they among students and professors?

ALTERNATIVE METHODS

Surprisingly, the most disruptive force in the textbook industry is not the e-book, but the market for used textbooks and textbook rentals. This doesn’t mean that the digital market is not significant, however. According to Forbes, e-book sales make almost a quarter of all consumer book sales. Digital textbooks – especially in K-12 – have slowly become more accepted and more widely adopted by schools, with more than “20% of all schools saying they now use digital textbooks and another 37% saying they will within the next five years.”

Recognizing the gradual and inevitable shift to digital textbooks, in 2012, Pearson, McGraw-Hill and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt announced that they would be partnering with Apple to include textbooks in Apple’s ‘iBookstore.’ These e-books would not be merely digital versions of the analogue version; instead, the textbooks will be designed to be interactive and multimedia to utilise features that the iPad offers and create a different learning experience.

However, these statistics do not directly translate to college. According to a study conducted by the research firm Student Monitor, only “2% of college students surveyed said they bought all of their textbooks in digital form, and only 14% said that they had classes that required online texts.” The NACS reported that “e-textbooks made up only 2.8 percent of total U.S. textbook sales in 2010.” Furthermore, a study conducted by the non-profit arm of the Pearson Foundation showed that “55% of students still prefer print over digital textbooks.”

There are several factors which account for college students’ ambivalent feelings towards e-books. Many students who were surveyed stated that they preferred the hard-copy so that they could highlight passages and take notes in the margins (features which are available in many e-books.) Most importantly, however, was that e-books are not significantly cheaper than the print copy. Forbes investigated the differences in the prices of textbooks using the example of “Chemistry” published by Brooks/Cole. According to Forbes, “the new book costs $205. For a used copy you’ll pay somewhat less than $155, and be prepared to fork over $167 for the digital version.” Renting the book however, costs a mere $65.

The internet has been instrumental in facilitating the growth of the textbook rental industry. For one, the internet allows students to easily search and compare prices for textbooks. Several key players such as Amazon, Chegg, and TextbookRentals offer textbooks for rent at a substantially lower cost than buying digital or used versions of the books. NACS reported that students can expect to save between 35% – 55% when renting a textbook, and that about 3,000 campus bookstores now also offer this service (albeit at a higher cost) The vast amount of online retailers also enable students to easily sell and buy used textbooks from each other, further undermining the profits of the publishing companies.

The textbook rental industry is clearly growing. While they charge students a significantly lower price compared to buying a textbook outright, the cost still adds up. There are several initiatives that aim to absolutely minimize the cost to students and relieve some of their financial burden.

NON-PROFIT AND GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES

 7

Boundless, based in Boston, Massachusetts, is a company which creates both free and inexpensive textbooks and distributes them solely online. Boundless has online textbooks in over 20 college level subjects, and offers these books for free. Paying $19.99 will get you the premium service, which includes “interactive study materials for each subject, including flashcards, quizzes, and summarization to help students retain information. It will also give students access to enhanced content and the native mobile apps.”

They also recently released 18 textbooks under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (the same license used by Wikipedia.) This will allow students and professors to use, change, and share the textbooks for free. Other similar initiatives include Flat World Knowledge, OpenStax College, and Bookboon.

The Michelson Twenty Million Minds Foundation supports “non-profit initiatives, for-profit start-ups, and policy thought leaders that utilize disruptive digital technologies to create a “higher education 3.0” system that can sustainably increase access, affordability, and student success.”” They provide free textbooks on a limited range of subjects, as well as a search engine to find the cheapest new, used, digital and rental textbooks online. Other non-profit organizations which fund similar initiatives include The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation.

The idea of creating a database of free, open and high quality textbooks have also been supported by the government. In 2012, Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation which would “fund the creation by California universities of 50 open textbooks targeted to lower-division courses.” The textbooks would be hosted by the California Digital open Source Library, with the California Open Education Resources Council overseeing the book approval process. The books would be free to download or a physical copy could be purchased for $20. Similar initiatives have been made in Utah, Florida, Main and Washington State.

In November, 2013, Senators Durbin and Franken introduced “The Affordable College Textbook Act.” This piece of legislation would “authorize the Secretary of Education to make grants to institutions of higher education to support pilot programs that expand the use of open textbooks in order to achieve savings for students.” The main goals of the act are to help “achieve the highest level of savings for students, expand the use of open textbooks at other IHEs, and produce open textbooks that are of the highest quality.” Unsurprisingly, such initiatives have been met with some resistance from the major publishing companies who claim that these actions interfere with the free market.

FUTURE OF THE TEXTBOOK INDUSTRY?

It is clear that textbooks will remain an integral part of a college education, despite the rising costs. Unfortunately, the mind-set of today that “everyone should have and deserves a college education” has justified these skyrocketing prices. However, the textbook industry is shifting. The initiatives to cut the costs of textbooks are still fairly recent, and its effects haven’t been fully realised yet. The continued rise of textbook prices suggests some sort of bubble; the intrinsic value of a textbook has not increased, so the prices must be a reflection on a tumultuous industry. It is possible that in the future, textbooks will be free or a minimal cost to a student’s education – or that textbooks will settle at a constant yet expensive price. In any case, if textbooks and indeed tuition continues to increase at the same rate at which it has over the last few years, it is not clear whether the investment in one’s education remains a sound and smart choice.

Bitcoin: the future of currency?

by Leave a Comment

spending-bitcoins

 

It’s an interesting fact of life that we often take money for granted. While it is true that “money makes the world go around” (and is constantly the source of both misery and happiness for us), the concept of what money is and what it represented is not questioned. In the United States, we rarely consider the value of money and our currency in relation to others’. These are the sorts of issues that the government, currency traders, and corporations worry about – not the everyday citizen. However, what happens when these assumptions are challenged? What happens when the value of our currency can’t be protected or backed by our government?

This is just one of many questions which have been brought up in the wake of the advent of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a relatively new form of currency that was created in 2009 by Satoshi Nakamoto (an alias created to disguise true identity of the individual(s)). Bitcoin is a unique form currency in many ways.

First of all, Bitcoin is an electronic form of currency. This means that one bitcoin can be split into almost infinitely smaller pieces, allowing people to spend just part of a bitcoin like they may spend part of a dollar in form of quarters or dimes. Bitcoins are stored in one’s secure wallet which has a unique address similar to a bank account number: disclosing the unique address to someone allows you to pay them or vice versa. Every legitimate transaction is kept on record on a public ledger called the ‘block chain.’ Each Bitcoin wallet involved in the transaction also ‘signs’ the transaction in order to prove that the transaction was approved by both parties and is coming from the owner of the wallet.

Bitcoin it also decentralised – there is no central bank or government that backs the value of bitcoin. In the U.S., for example, the U.S. Federal Reserve decides how much money should be circulating within the economy via interest rates in order to control inflation. Bitcoin, on the other hand, uses peer-to-peer technology in order to “operate with no central authority or banks; managing transactions and the issuing of bitcoins is carried out collectively by the network.” This implies that Bitcoin is a more democratic form of currency, whose value is dictated completely by the market and how much people are willing to pay for Bitcoins.

Because Bitcoin lacks a central authority to both regulate and provide the source of the money, the way in which bitcoins are created is also different. Bitcoins are created through the process of ‘mining’ – like how one might mine for precious metals. However in this case, miners use powerful computers in order to solve extremely complex computer algorithms. Upon solving these algorithms, the miner is rewarded with bitcoins. More specifically, bitcoin mining is the process of verifying bitcoin transactions.

As mentioned previously, every bitcoin transaction is verified and encrypted so that others cannot undermine the integrity of the transaction by changing its details (time, amount, etc.) Since there are many transactions that happen every minute, transactions are compiled together in a box which is secured with an electronic padlock – “block chains.” Miners run software on their computers which attempt to open the padlock. Once the padlock is open, the miner is rewarded with bitcoins. According to blockchain.info, the average number of attempts it takes to unlock a block chain is 1,789,546,951.05. With a GTX 680 GPU and at the current difficulty level, a single miner can expect to mine one bitcoin in 98 years.

Because bitcoins are ‘mined,’ there are is a finite number of bitcoins available. The code that was written ensures that there will be 21 million bitcoins available. Today, there are more than 12 million bitcoins in circulation. The fewer the bitcoins are to be mined, the harder and more complex mining becomes, decreasing the rate at which bitcoins are mined. Currently, the a maximum of 25 bitcoins are able to be mined every ten minutes.

 

block

 

Bitcoin is an attempt to address many of the flaws present in a traditional form of currency. Much like cash, using bitcoin is almost completely anonymous. One never has to disclose their credit card details, name or identity in a bitcoin transaction, so long as their bitcoin address is valid. There are also no required transaction fees or foreign exchange fees when using bitcoins. For larger transactions – where one may gather bitcoins from multiple addresses – a transaction fee is usually expected but still not mandatory. There is an incentive to pay and charge transaction fees, however; bitcoin miners who validate the transaction are the ones who receive the transaction fee. Paying a transaction fee is “an incentive on the part of the bitcoin user to make sure that a particular transaction will get included into the next block which is generated.”

However the advent of Bitcoin has also raised significant concerns and highlighted some controversy. Due to the relative anonymity Bitcoin provides, there are some who use Bitcoin to conduct malignant operations and purchase illegal goods such as drugs. The U.S. for example, has researched heavily into Bitcoin and has illustrated its concerns over the potential terrorist threat Bitcoin poses: “The introduction of virtual currency will likely shape threat finance by increasing the opaqueness, transactional velocity, and overall efficiencies of terrorist attacks.”

However, the U.S. is not alone in these concerns. Due to Bitcoin’s connection with illicit activities, Russia has banned the use of Bitcoin: “Systems for anonymous payments and cyber currencies that have gained considerable circulation — including the most well-known, Bitcoin — are money substitutes and cannot be used by individuals or legal entities.” Furthermore, Russia had emphasized that the Rouble is to remain Russia’s only official currency, and that any introduction of other currencies or other monetary units would be illegal.

Because Bitcoin’s value at this point is completely on of public perception, it is an extremely volatile form of currency. While the lack of a central authority controlling its value means that political instability or corruption won’t affect its value, it also means that there is no force that is able to stabilize its value. In October, 2013, one bitcoin was valued at about $126 USD. Just one month later, the value skyrocketed to almost $1010 USD. In April, 2014 the value dropped back down to $420 USD. The extreme volatility of the currency is a serious cause of concern for many, preventing Bitcoin from being a universally accepted currency. Bitcoin is accepted by a few online merchants as well as select businesses and individuals around the world (mostly in Europe.)

Bitcoin remains a complex, innovative and experimental form of currency. While there have been variations of Bitcoin (such as Lightcoin and Dogecoin), its feasibility as a widely accepted form of money has yet to be tested.

 

Sources: 

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2151261/beginners-guide-to-mining-litecoin-dogecoin-and-other-bitcoin-variants.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/26/what-is-bitcoin_n_4661604.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/25/us-bitcoin-mtgox-factbox-idUSBREA1O21M20140225

http://money.cnn.com/infographic/technology/what-is-bitcoin/

https://bitcoin.org/en/faq#what-is-bitcoin

https://bitcoin.org/en/how-it-works

https://coinbase.com/charts

http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/9/5395050/russia-bans-bitcoin

Community Colleges: Benefit or Burden?

by Leave a Comment

Sarkis Ekmekian is a junior at USC majoring in communication. He’s taking four classes, is the show-runner for Speakers’
Committee, public relations chair at Trojan Pride, and is a campus centre consultant at the Ronald Tutor Campus Centre.

He also is a transfer student.

Ekmekian, one of 1,430 transfer students who enrolled in USC in fall 2013, transferred from Santa Monica College, a top feeder school for USC and the University of California. Community college transfer students have a strong presence at USC: 58% of the fall 2013 transfer class were community college students (up from 50% from fall 2012).

The California Community College system is the largest system of not only community colleges but higher education in the nation, with more than 2.1 million students and 112 campuses. According to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, “70% of state nurses and 80% of firefighters, law enforcement personnel, and emergency medical technicians” are educated at California community colleges.” Furthermore, most California community colleges have agreements with the UC and CSU system in regards to transfer students: 29% of UC and 51% of CSU graduates started at a California community college.

However over the last few years, California Community Colleges, along with the UC and CSU system, have suffered through severe funding cuts due to the Great Recession. Funding for California Community Colleges was “cut $1.5 billion – about 12% of its funding – between the 2007-08 and 2011-12 academic years,” resulting in about 25% of college courses to be cut.

As a result, there has been a significant decline in both the number of transfer applicants to four-year colleges and enrolment at community colleges in California. UCs received 1,653 fewer transfer applications from community colleges in the fall 2013 year, compared with fall 2011. California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office also reported that “enrolment [in California community colleges] decreased by more than 585,000 students to 2.3 million in four academic years (from 2008-09 to 2012-13) due to severe budget cuts.”

Now that the economy has slowly begun to recover, the California government has been looking to put more money back in state-funded institutions. But do community colleges offer a significant enough economic benefit to the economy to warrant reinvestment from the government?

The state certainly believes that community colleges provide significant economic benefit to the economy. Recently, Gov. Jerry Brown proposed a budget which would increase funding to community colleges by $1 billion. The funding would freeze tuition rates at the current rate of $46 per unit and “allow colleges to increase enrollment by 3 percent. Enrollment [of new students] has been cut by up to 15 percent since 2010.” According to Brown, the additional funding would allow students to transfer faster by increasing the amount of classes, counsellors and academic resources available to students.

According to a report conducted by the American Association of Community Colleges, “in 2012 alone, the net total impact of community colleges on the U.S. economy was $809 billion in added income, equal to 5.4 percent of GDP.” Furthermore, “community-college graduates receive nearly $5 in a return on investment (ROI) for every dollar they spend on their education.” The report also found that associate degree completers earn an average of $10,700 more than someone with a high-school diploma at the midpoint of their career. Furthermore, according to the Pew Research Center, the unemployment rate of those aged 25 to 35 drops from an average of 12.2% for high-school graduates to 8.1% to those with a two-year college degree. The report also found that on average, two-year college graduates will earn on average of $2,000 more than high-school graduates per year.

From an economic point of view, it is evident that it is the state’s best interest to encourage more efficient transferring and graduation rates. According to the American Association of Community Colleges, “U.S. taxpayers paid $44.9 billion to support the operations of America’s community colleges in 2012.” In return society will receive “$1.2 trillion in benefits, the sum of the added income and social savings that the 2012 student population will generate in the U.S. economy.” Furthermore, when students earn more because of their higher education, they also pay more in taxes: “federal, state, and local governments will collect a present value of $285.7 billion in the form of higher tax receipts over the students’ working lives [due to community colleges].”

The proposal for additional funding has been met with approval from community colleges, professors and students who have long suffered from severe underfunding. “We have been underfunded for a really long time compared to K-12 and the UC system,” explained Mary Mazzocco, who is the journalism department chair and advisor for school newspaper “The Inquirer” at Diablo Valley College. “Given how many students we serve, given that we are the gateway for non-traditional college students, and given our role in helping retrain people who lose their jobs… I do feel like that they should at least give us the money to allow us to do the job that they have given us to do. And I feel like they haven’t done that in a really long time.”

Statistically, students who manage to transfer to four-year institutions are successful. According to the University of California’s Accountability Report, “transfer students entering UC since 2004 have a 50 to 53 percent two-year graduation rate and an 85 to 86 percent four-year graduation rate.” By comparison, freshmen from the same cohort who enter the UC system have a four-year graduation rate of 60% and a six-year graduation rate of 84%. According to the Pew Research Center, millennials with a bachelor’s degree or more earn on average $45500 – compared to the average income of $30000 for those with an associate degree.

Rachel Ann Reyes is a student at Diablo Valley College majoring in communication. She has been accepted to UC Davis for fall 2014, and is awaiting responses from UC San Diego and UC Santa Barbara. When she transfers, she will be the first in her family to attend an American university. “I’ve personally really enjoyed being at a community college,” said Reyes. “I think that sometimes community colleges get a bad rep for being almost being a continuation of high school, but I think it’s a great opportunity for people who want to save money. If they are determined enough to go to community college to get their AA degree or transfer, I think it can be a really helpful tool at a great cost.”

However, there are also concerns about the efficiency of community colleges – particularly regarding the students who either take too long or don’t manage to graduate or transfer to a four-year college. In 2009, the average graduation rate from California community colleges was only 25.08%, while the transfer rate was an even lower 14.36%. An op-ed in the LA Times also criticized the inefficiency of community colleges and the burden that it places on the economy: “Community colleges are subsidized through direct state and local government appropriations and through student grant programs. Every student who drops out represents an investment loss by the taxpayers in that student’s uncompleted education.” Through further investigation, they found that “of the full-time, degree-seeking students who entered California community colleges in 2007, more than 35,000 had not earned their degrees three years later, and most of them were no longer enrolled in any postsecondary institution.”

The state has attempted to address the low transfer and graduation rates of community college by pushing “state law requiring guaranteed transfer pathways for graduates of the two-year institutions.” Furthermore, new bills would require the CSU system to accept a wider range of transfer degrees when possible, with the transfer pathways focused on “areas of emphasis rather than majors.”

While Mazzocco realizes the importance that community colleges play in transferring students and awarding qualifications, she also worries that the mission of community colleges has taken a turn for the worse – and that too much emphasis has been placed on just the economic benefits of an education. “Historically community colleges were not just for transfer students, but the state has adjusted our mission – we are now supposed to focus on certificates and transferring,” said Mazzocco.

The campus library at Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill is nearly empty at the end of the day as the community college has suffered from budget cuts, its student population down 700 from last fall. Photo: Brant Ward, The Chronicle

The campus library at Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill is nearly empty at the end of the day as the community college has suffered from budget cuts, its student population down 700 from last fall. Photo: Brant Ward, The SF Chronicle

“There’s a certain amount of worry that the states push for us to become more efficient and to cut classes that are not high demand, and to focus on certain classes that transfer or go towards a degree,” Mazzocco explained. “For example we’ve added another Mass Communication class because now it’s a part of two or three different majors that transfer. But now I probably have to take feature writing out of the curriculum… because it doesn’t fit into the transfer degree that was agreed upon on the state level… and that’s happening with a lot of classes that are good classes. There’s value to be had to be taking them and offering them, but they don’t fit the pattern that’s being established and are being squeezed out.”

However, there is still a value in attending community colleges that can’t be quantified for some students. “If I had gone to a UC or university straight out of high school, I wouldn’t know what to do,” admitted Reyes. “I think my three years at DVC (Diablo Valley College) have really helped me discover who I am. I got the opportunity to take different classes in different fields and figure out what I liked and didn’t like at an affordable cost. Through that experience I fell into journalism and communication and that is something I really enjoy – I would have never found that straight of high school. Because of community college I am more prepared, and more willing and motivated to succeed at a university because I know what I want and I can apply myself to that.”

 

 

Community colleges: benefit or burden?

by Leave a Comment

Sarkis Ekmekian is a junior at USC, majoring in communication. He’s taking four classes, is the show-runner for Speakers’ Committee, public relations chair at Trojan Pride, and is a campus centre consultant at the Ronald Tutor Campus Centre.

He also is a transfer student.

Ekmekian, one of 1,430 transfer students who enrolled in USC in fall 2013, transferred from Santa Monica College, a top feeder school for USC and University of California. Community college transfer students have a strong presence at USC: 58% of the fall 2013 transfer class were community college students (up from 50% from fall 2012).

Community colleges have many purposes, from allowing students to save money on tuition, to allowing non-traditional students a place to pursue a different career path. The California Community College system is the largest system of not only community colleges but higher education in the nation, with more than 2.1 million students and 112 campuses. According to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, “70% of state nurses and 80% of firefighters, law enforcement personnel, and emergency medical technicians” are educated at California community colleges.” Furthermore, most California community colleges have agreements with the UC and CSU system in regards to transfer students: 29% of UC and 51% of CSU graduates started at a California community college.

However over the last few years, California Community Colleges, along with the UC and CSU system, have suffered severe funding cuts due to the Great Recession. Funding for California Community Colleges was “cut $1.5 billion between the 2007-08 and 2011-12 academic years”, resulting in about 25% of college courses to be cut.

As a result, there has been a significant decline in both the number of transfer applicants to four-year colleges and enrolment at community colleges in California. UCs received 1,653 fewer transfer applications from community colleges in the fall 2013 year, compared to fall 2011. California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office also reported that “enrolment [in California community colleges] decreased by more than 585,000 students to 2.3 million in four academic years (from 2008-09 to 2012-13) due to severe budget cuts.”

Budget cuts have also caused the success rate of community colleges slip in recent years. According to an article in the Oakland Tribune, “As unemployment swelled, the system simultaneously saw soaring demand and $1.5 billion in state funding cuts, forcing its colleges to cut back on student services and classes. State universities also accepted fewer transfers during that time, another factor working against students.”

Now, with the economy showing faint signs of improvement, the question becomes whether the economic benefits that community colleges provide is significant enough for the state to reinvest money into the system. The passing of Proposition 30 in 2012 meant that the education sector dodged $6 billion worth of budget cuts. Community colleges were granted $210 million for 2012-13, allowing for the addition of 3300 classes for the Spring 2013 semester, 40000 additional students, and a temporary halt in the increasing tuition rate.

Recently, Gov. Jerry Brown proposed a budget which would increase funding to community colleges by $1 billion. The funding would freeze tuition rates at the current rate of $46 per unit and “allow colleges to increase enrolment by 3 percent. Enrolment has been cut by up to 15 percent since 2010.” According to Brown, the additional funding would allow students to transfer faster by increasing the amount of classes, counsellors and academic resources available to students.

The state certainly believes that there is community colleges provide significant economic benefit to the economy. According to a report conducted by the American Association of Community Colleges, “in 2012 alone, the net total impact of community colleges on the U.S. economy was $809 billion in added income, equal to 5.4 percent of GDP.” Furthermore, “community-college graduates receive nearly $5 in benefits for every dollar they spend on their education.” The average income also steadily increases with the education level, with those with associate degrees earning an average of $10700 more than someone with a high-school diploma.

The proposal for additional funding has been met with approval from community colleges, professors and students who have long suffered from severe underfunding. “We have been underfunded for a really long time compared to K-12 and the UC system,” explained Mary Mazzocco, who is the journalism department chair and advisor for school newspaper ‘The Inquirer’ at Diablo Valley College. “Given how many students we serve, given that we are the gateway for non-traditional college students, and given our role in helping retrain people who lose their jobs… I do feel like that they should at least give us the money to allow us to do the job that they have given us to do. And I feel like they haven’t done that in a really long time.”

Students who manage to transfer to four-year institutions are statistically successful. According to the University of California’s Accountability Report, “transfer students entering UC since 2004 have a 50 to 53 percent two-year graduation rate and an 85 to 86 percent four-year graduation rate.” By comparison, freshmen from the same cohort who enter the UC system have a four-year graduation rate of 60% and a six-year graduation rate of 84%.

 

Rachel Ann Reyes is a student at Diablo Valley College majoring in communication. She has been accepted to UC Davis for fall 2014, and is awaiting responses from UC San Diego and UC Santa Barbara. When she transfers, she will be the first in her family to attend an American university. “I’ve personally really enjoyed being at a community college,” said Reyes. “I think that sometimes community colleges get a bad rep for being almost being a continuation of high school, but I think it’s a great opportunity for people who want to save money. If they are determined enough to go to community college to get their AA degree or transfer, I think it can be a really helpful tool at a great cost.”

However, there are also concerns about the efficiency of community colleges – particularly regarding the students who either take too long or don’t manage to graduate or transfer to a four-year college. In 2009, the average graduation rate from California community colleges was only 25.08% while the transfer rate was an even lower 14.36%. An op-ed in the LA Times also criticized the ineffiency of community colleges and the burden that it places on the economy: “Community colleges are subsidized through direct state and local government appropriations and through student grant programs. Every student who drops out represents an investment loss by the taxpayers in that student’s uncompleted education.” Through further investigation, they found that “of the full-time, degree-seeking students who entered California community colleges in 2007, more than 35,000 had not earned their degrees three years later, and most of them were no longer enrolled in any postsecondary institution.”

The state has attempted to address the low transfer and graduation rates of community college by pushing “state law requiring guaranteed transfer pathways for graduates of the two-year institutions.” Furthermore, new bills would require the CSU system to accept a wider range of transfer degrees when possible, with the transfer pathways focused on “areas of emphasis rather than majors.”

While Mazzocco realizes the importance that community colleges play in transferring students and awarding qualifications, she also worries that the mission of community colleges has taken a turn for the worse. “Historically community colleges were not just for transfer students, but the state has adjusted our mission – we are now supposed to focus on certificates and transferring,” said Mazzocco. “And I don’t agree with that mentality – I think there is an advantage to life-long learning.”

Mazzocco went on to describe the changing environment of community colleges. “There’s a certain amount of worry that the states push for us to become more efficient and to cut classes that are not high demand, and to focus on certain classes that transfer or go towards a degree. For example we’ve added another Mass Communication class because now it’s a part of two or three different majors that transfer. But now I probably have to take feature writing out of the curriculum – not because students don’t enjoy it or because it’s a lousy class, but because it doesn’t fit into the transfer degree that was agreed upon on the state level… and that’s happening with a lot of classes that are good classes. There’s value to be had to be taking them and offering them, but they don’t fit the pattern that’s being established and are being squeezed out.”

From a purely economic point of view, it is evident that it is the state’s best interest to encourage more efficient transferring and graduation rates: “For every $1 California invests in students who graduate from college, the state expects to receive a net return on investment of $4.50.” Furthermore, millennials with a bachelor’s degree or more earn on average $45500 – compared to the average income of $30000 for those with an associate degree.

However, there is still a value in attending community colleges that can’t be quantified for some students. “If I had gone to a UC or university straight out of high school, I wouldn’t know what to do,” admitted Reyes. “I think my three years at DVC (Diablo Valley College) have really helped me discover who I am. I got the opportunity to take different classes in different fields and figure out what I liked and didn’t like at an affordable cost. Through that experience I fell into journalism and communication and that is something I really enjoy – I would have never found that straight of high school. Because of community college I am more prepared, and more willing and motivated to succeed at a university because I know what I want and I can apply myself to that.”

The Few. The Proud. The Unemployed.

by Leave a Comment

Economic indicators are crucial to helping determine the state of the economy. As we are unable to physically or literally see the economy per se, economic indicators allow us to not only confirm economic trends (lagging indicators), but they also enable to help us predict future patterns and cycles.

While economists mostly rely on economic indicators such as a nation’s gross domestic product, unemployment rate, or consumer price index, there are also more unusual and unconventional indicators which may illustrate an economy’s state. An economic indicator that I found particularly interesting was the Marine Advertisement Intensity Index. The concept is simple: The more intense in nature the advertisements for the Marines were, the weaker the job market – and subsequently, the economy.

The Marines – as well as any branch of the U.S. military – offers many benefits in order to make enlisting more desirable and appealing to potential new recruits. According to the Marines’ official website, a Marine can enjoy “full health coverage, access to on-base medical facilities, free on-base housing, monthly housing allowances, low-cost mortgage loans and educational funding.” Furthermore, Marine families are also offered additional amenities, including healthcare, day-care and counselling. During an economic recession, these benefits and the promise of job security can seem especially appealing to high-school graduates who may feel that a potentially high college loan is unjustified – especially if the prospects of a future job are uncertain. In contrast, during times of economic prosperity, more high-school graduates are likely to go to college – therefore lowering the number of new Marine recruits.

The intensity of Marine advertisements is then reflected in the amount of people who enlist. In 2005, the Marines’ advertisement “The Climb” sought to recruit new members by invoking feeling of patriotism, pride, and accomplishment. The advertisement depicts a lone young man climbing a cliff without any equipment. While he struggles, images of Marines in full dress uniform, helping young children, and working together under a waving American flag are superimposed on the cliff-face encourage him to climb on. At the end, the advertisement emphasizes teamwork and duty in order to convince young men to enlist. In 2005 the economy and the job market was booming – however at the same time, it was a tough year in terms of Marine recruitment. The advertisement sought to recruit all who were willing – evident in its highly emotive, patriotic advertisement.

In 2008, however, saw the Marine Corps not only meeting but exceeding recruitment goals for the next three years. Furthermore, 99% of the new recruits were high-school graduates – up from 95%. Subsequently, the 2009 Marines advertisement, “America’s Few,” depicted a very different lifestyle than the one shown in the 2004 advertisement. In “America’s Few,” three men are shown enduring the rigorous challenges of boot-camp training, including but not limited to, running through intense obstacle courses, undergoing intense physical training, and bracing brutal, unforgiving weather. This grittier, perhaps more realistic depiction of military life illustrates a change in mentality – with more people willing to sign up, the Marines have the luxury of choice and can afford to be pickier in who they recruit.

U.S. Annual Unemployment Rate

 

When looking at the data, there is a clear correlation between unemployment rates and the number of new recruit. In 2004, the U.S. unemployment rate was 5.5%. In 2009, however, this rate soared to 9.3%. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.) The number of new recruits in 2004 and 2009 fiscal year were 36,794 and 42,226 respectively. (Marine Corps. Times, U.S. Department of Defense)

The trend seems to have continued, with the Marine Corps accession rate dropping to 32,215 in 2013. (Department of Defense) At the same time, their numerical accession goals have dropped – perhaps in anticipation of a slowly recovering job market. Does that mean we can expect – assuming unemployment rates continue to drop – not only fewer recruits, but also recruits who are not as strong as the recruits of 2008 or 2009? It is interesting that in an unstable economy, more and more Americans are willing to endure not only arduous physical military training but also the possibility of warfare and violence in hopes of securing a better future – just a glimpse into the desperation that the Great Recession created.

Amazebowls: a refreshing insight into the trendy food truck industry

by Leave a Comment

Amazebowls – acai bowls topped with fruit and granola

Desmond Ng is the co-founder and owner of “Amazebowls,” a trendy, popular food truck that can usually be found situated on the outskirts of USC. Contrary to the stereotype, Amazebowls doesn’t sell the stereotypical greasy street fare one might expect; instead, this bright purple truck offers customers fresh and tasty acai (ah-sigh-ee) bowls, topped with fruit and granola. Described by Ng as a “healthy alternative to ice-cream or sorbet,” these vegan and gluten-free treats offer health-conscious students a delicious replacement to the usual fast food options offered at USC.

Amazebowls was founded in August 2013 by Desmond Ng and Bryan Leong after the two came across the concept in Santa Barbara. “I pretty much fell in love with them,” Ng admitted. “However, when I came back to LA, I realised that hardly anyone was selling it. Places that did sell it were either too expensive or not that good at all. So I started making them at home, and my friends told me that if I wanted to start something with it they’d invest in it. So we tested it out at SC – we trialled it at a couple of different events like Taste of Downtown LA, KXSC-fest, Springfest, Study Nights… and the response was really positive.”

One of the most difficult obstacles for a small business is finding initial capital – whether that be through loans, investors, or one’s own savings – especially in the current economy. According to Gallp Inc., 28% of small businesses indicated that they were less optimistic about their business’ future going into 2014 than they were going into 2013. While Ng was fortunate enough to have two close friends who were willing to invest in him and the product, he too struggled to initially start his business. “We wanted to start a store, but we couldn’t find a good location at a good price,” said Ng.  “A food truck was our next best option.”

As Amazebowls is a relatively new business, it hasn’t had much time to adapt to the ever changing economic cycles. Furthermore, its main customer base – USC students – doesn’t seem, at least in the short-term, too frugal about spending their disposable income. “We haven’t really been affected so far from the recession,” said Ng.

However Amazebowls still had is main share of challenges. Ng lists the factor of uncertainty as one of the biggest challenges in running his business. “It’s [the food industry] very competitive,” explained Ng. “We have to do a lot to make ends meet – even though we get a lot of sales, the costs are really high. The costs of running the truck, wages, running costs, etc. It all adds up.” Furthermore, the recent opening of “Nectar,” a juice bar on campus serves as another competitor to Amazebowl, targeting a similar audience.

While Ng doesn’t have to pay rent, owning a food truck offers a different set of challenges. “Sourcing a food truck is not cheap, and a lot of people don’t realise how big the expenses are,” explained Ng. “Also, a lot of things are just out of our control. It’s not like a store where things are fixed and people can deliver to you – we only have a certain amount of space in the truck and we have to restock every day. It takes a few hours for us to get all our supplies. It can also be difficult finding parking. If we don’t find parking in the morning, we can lose crucial hours of business which cuts into our profits.”

Amazebowls is also heavily affected by the weather and the seasons. “The weather definitely affects our business – even more so because we’re a food truck. People don’t like coming to food trucks when it’s cold,” said Ng. “We also definitely felt that there was less business after big holidays like New Year’s and Christmas – people had spent too much during that  time and were not as willing to go out as much to eat.” Furthermore, the colder weather has not only decreased their customer base but also increased costs. For example, since the summer, the price of strawberries – a main fruit in the acai bowl – have gone up dramatically, further affecting Amazebowl’s profit margins.

A major concern which has not only Ng but other food truck and small business owners worried is the possibility of minimum wage going up. “Right now, we’re reworking our cash flow just in case minimum wage goes up,” explained Ng. “That’s a big thing. A lot of food truck owners that I speak to are worried that the increase in minimum wage will affect their businesses. Basically you’ll have to either raise your prices or absorb the losses – and that eats into your profit a lot.” When asked whether Ng will resort raising prices if wages do go up, Ng showed reluctance. “I’d rather not,” he admitted. Instead, Ng hopes to be able build a larger, loyal customer base with aggressive and clever marketing techniques so that profits maintain high.

In the future, Ng hopes to be able to expand Amazebowls into an actual store – however the challenges that come with that are immense. Rent is a main factor, with the average price per square foot in Los Angeles increasing 13.8% from last year to $428. “A lot of food trucks try and get into stores and they end up being unsuccessful,” said Ng. “We did a lot of research, and it’s a lot easier for a restaurant to get a food truck than a food truck trying to become a restaurant. We have to do a lot more research, and wait for both us and the economy to be in a good place.”