Hey survivors and frivers. In this video I am going to be talking about the 6 core human needs and how this relates to narcissism. Please like, comment, share and subscribe. Click the bell icon to receive notifications for my future videos. If you would like to donate, my PayPal link is in the video description. If you are interested in one-on-one coaching, you can email me at narxvivercoaching.com. We have a private Reddit community where survivors and frivers can share their experiences and knowledge. If you are interested in being a part of this community, you can sign up for our Patreon page, the link is in the video description. Check out the Narx Viver merchandise store where you can purchase your own Narx Viver t-shirt or mug. We have a variety of designs and it is a great way to support the channel. The link to our Narx Viver merchandise store is in the video description. 6 core human needs According to Anthony Robbins, human beings can be motivated by their desire to fulfill 6 core needs. These needs are not just wants or desires, they form the basis of every choice we make. Through understanding what drives our decisions and behaviours, we can identify what needs a narcissist is trying to fulfill and what unfulfilled needs have caused them to develop these narcissistic decisions and behaviours. We can also identify what needs we need to fulfill and what needs we are not being fulfilled in the relationship with a narcissist. Every day we fulfill these needs, either in a way that is beneficial or resourceful or in a destructive and resourceful way. Narcists most often choose to meet their needs in a destructive and resourceful way. You can either build a person up or break them down. You can either build or destroy, a narcissist prefer to destroy. According to Anthony Robbins, the 6 core human needs are certainty, uncertainty or variety, significance, love and connection, growth, contribution. The first 4 needs are defined as needs of the personality. The last 2 needs are identified as needs of the spirit.  It is the need for safety, security, comfort, order, reliability, predictability, control and consistency. Uncertainty or variety is the need for surprise, challenges, excitement, change, difference and adventure. These first 2 needs work with each other. If there is an imbalance in one need, it will affect the other. If there is too much certainty, you can experience boredom and then desire to experience excitement or adventure and this is why so many long term relationships fail. They become too predictable, there isn't enough excitement or adventure. Narcists get bored easily. They like the safety and security around their supply but due to the high level of certainty they also require a secondary source of supply to fulfill the need of uncertainty or variety. Significance is the need to have meaning, to feel special, to be needed or wanted, important or lovable. Growth and connection is the need for communication, attachment or intimacy. Narcists spend too much of their time and effort on gaining significance rather than love or connection. So with Narcists there is usually an imbalance there. The final 2 needs are the needs of the spirit. They provide the structure for happiness and fulfillment. Growth is the need for constant emotional, intellectual and spiritual development. Contribution is the need to give to others, to serve, care and protect other people. I have found in my personal experience that Narcists do not place much importance on the final 2 needs, growth or contribution. Some Narcists might work on their intellectual or spiritual development but usually neglect their emotional development. Narcists are also self-absorbed and lack empathy. So the need to contribute isn't going to be important to them, unless it can benefit them in some way. Narcism is a coping mechanism and a defence mechanism and an adaptation for not fulfilling these 6 core human needs. Narcism also allows the Narcists to fulfill the first 4 needs. It gives them safety and security, comfort and order, but this causes their source of supply to become reliable and predictable for them, although easy to control. It creates an imbalance of certainty and uncertainty. The Narcist gets bored as the relationship is no longer given them a balance of certainty and uncertainty. To fulfill this need for uncertainty, they might find a new target, it gives them a feeling of excitement or adventure. This could also help to fulfill their need of significance. Another way for them to fulfill their need of significance is to tear you down, abuse and manipulate you, devalue and degrade, humiliate and exploit you, but because they spend so much time and effort on gaining significance, it creates an imbalance within another need they are trying to fulfill, which is love and connection. The importance to the Narcist of fulfilling their needs for certainty, uncertainty and significance overrides the importance of their need for love and connection. There is always going to be at least one of the Narcist core human needs, which is unfulfilled. This is why they do what they do, because they are trying to fulfill one of their core human needs. If you pay attention to their decisions and behaviors, it should become clear which need they are trying to fulfill. Narcists often neglect their need for growth, they neglect their emotional development, yet their decisions and behaviors are based off of these undeveloped emotions. Rather than any logical reasoning, some Narcists might place importance on intellectual and spiritual development. This is usually if they believe that it can help them obtain Narcist supply, or if it can help them to fulfill one of the other needs. Narcists don't really have a need to contribute, unless it can benefit them in some way. Their envy and self-hatred overrides any empathy or desire to contribute they would otherwise have. They are self-absorbed and lack empathy, because their needs are not being fulfilled, including the needs which they do not place much importance on, just because they do not consider them to be important. It does not mean that these unfulfilled needs are not going to have an effect on their decisions and behaviors, and on their health. Narcists do what they do, because they are trying to fulfill these six core human needs. We stay with them, because we are trying to fulfill those same needs. Which we have, Narcists who you don't even know could become passive aggressive or violent towards you, as a way of fulfilling their needs. It will give them a sense of a certainty and significance, as well as creating an intimate connection with you.  Many of these people in their childhood were made to believe that they are not lovable, they are not worthy or deserving of love. So rather than trying to develop real human connection, they will become passive aggressive or violent towards you, as a way of fulfilling those same needs. They take a different road to get to the same destination, but it ends up being less fulfilling, which only causes them to become more frustrated and resentful towards you.  People will give up their goals and dreams to meet their needs, they will even give up their own values to meet their needs. With Narcists their needs have even more importance than they do to the average person. Narcists also do not have any consistent values, Narcists do what they do because they have developed destructive or unresourceful ways of fulfilling these six core human needs. These destructive or unresourceful ways of fulfilling these needs are a response to trauma or to a hostile environment in childhood. Thank you for watching, I hope this video resonated with you, please like, comment, share and subscribe. If you would like to donate, my PayPal link is in the video description. Coaching Inquiries, you can email me at narcisfivercoaching at gmail.com, more video soon.


A set, informally, is a collection of things considered to be a single object. Set notation requires the use of curly brackets, and the objects within these brackets are called the elements of the set. The elements in a set do not need to be in any order, but we will typically see numerical values in an order. Sets are usually named with a capital letter. Some sets have their own defined letter, and others are made up. For example, z is the set of integers or whole numbers. We can define our sets with our own letters, for example, e, for the set of even numbers. It also works for words, such as a, the set for animals. We also have something called the universal set. This includes everything we are looking for, and usually has the symbol epsilon. For example, with the letters of the English alphabet, v is the set for vowels, but included in the universal set are all letters. When we have two sets, we can look at how they are linked. We use this symbol, called intersection, to say something is in both sets we are looking at. We can use this symbol, union, to say that an object is in one set or the other. To say an object is not in a set, we use an apostrophe, like this. Let's see an example. Look at sets A and B. To find the set A into section B, we are looking for values which appear in both. Pause the video and see if you can identify it. The shared values are 10 and 20, so A into section B would look like this. For A union B, we are looking for values in either. Pause and try for yourself. The values 10 and 20 appear in each set, but only need to appear once in the union set, so A union B should look like this. Event diagrams are a useful way of looking at union and intersection, particularly for finding probabilities. If you see P, A, this is asking you for the probability an object is in set A. On a Venn diagram, P, A would look like this. For not in set A or P, A apostrophe, it would look like this, the inverse. Union where we share values on a Venn diagram is the central section. The probability of an object being in this section would be given the notation P, A, intersection B. Union the set A or set B notation looks like this on a Venn diagram. It has a larger area to choose from, because it only requires one or the other, not both. Typically, union probabilities are higher than intersection. The probability notation for this is given by P, A, union, B. Overall, there are eight variations of combination. If you can remember four, the other four are the opposites for A, B, and the link symbol. For example, this is P, A, intersection B. Notice the shaded shared section. The inverse area within the universal set has the opposite notation. So A and B gain apostrophes and intersection becomes union. P, A, apostrophe, union, B, apostrophe. This is the Venn diagram for P, A, union, B. Its inverse is given by notation P, A, apostrophe, intersection, B, apostrophe. Remember to find the opposite notation and change each symbol for its opposite. This is P, A, intersection, B, apostrophe. Can you work out the notation for the inverse Venn diagram? How did you do? P, A, apostrophe, union, B. Finally, P, A, apostrophe, intersection, B. Try and find the inverse notation. How did you get on? P, A, union, B, apostrophe. So there you have a quick guide to set notation. Applying union and intersection to Venn diagrams can be tricky. So taking them step by step is always advisable. If you liked the video, give it a thumbs up. And don't forget to subscribe. Comment below if you have any questions. Why not check out our Fusco app as well? Until next time.


Have you ever wondered how to caramelize mushrooms and onions at the same time? Well, I'm going to show you with my Le Cuisine Dutch Oven. They don't have to be sliced really nice. It doesn't matter whether red or white. I prefer red.  Just put them in the Dutch Oven, put in a little salt, a little pepper, a little bit of ghee, and then that's it. Medium high. That's it. Low and slow for like 20 minutes.


update. Over one buzzle chapter here, this is the 11 o'clock Tiger for National News Network market update on this Tuesday the 5th of April. The Dow has unchanged at 34,922. It's just been all over the show. It had a huge move up to 35,112 and then a big slide down to 34,813. It's now a hundred points off the low but the Fed came out and really put the cabash or whatever it's called on the on the rally and we'll see how we end the day. If the Dow is able to hold in this area into early afternoon and you can get some kind of strength back again and say the QQQ or the S&P I think we could close very nicely on the day but they're just a little too many ifs there. So just let's see if the Dow is down 65 points or more at 230 to 3 o'clock. That's going to be a big problem but it's actually a little bit positive. That's going to be good. We're looking at the S&P down 16 and 45,65. Both of the Dow and the S&P made the requisite Chapman Way buy mode peak D's and now they're taking a bit of a rest. We'll see what happens. I am talking about Wednesday to Thursday that we need to see another push to the upside especially in the QQQ which was doing fantastically until the close yesterday and then an open week got even weaker and it's down now almost 5 points at 364.60 and this is really important with this particular pattern each speed. So by Thursday we need to be seeing the 370s tackled and go higher from there. Looking at the IWM being very weak and still very weak down two and a half but it's gold that is really the issue here because whatever the Fed said how did it affect all these different areas? Look gold is now only up in fact it's unchanged. It was up earlier. It's just stuck in this range. Crude oil is stuck in the range. It's down 71 cents. Spectacular move up but it's just holding. Where is the dollar? The dollar is on the way to the upper end of its range. There it is. We spoke about rectangle formations. This is the large rectangle formation that also turns into an elongated sideways move between 99.42 and 97.70 and here we are at 99.15. It liked whatever the Fed said. Look at the TLT. No, it did not like it at all. It's down 267 and 128.79 and that means the yields are going higher. I mentioned in my show we looked at it. The 5-year went over the 30-year. The 5-year T-note yield was above the 30. The market doesn't like that. So it has to take a few days to digest that, I guess. Thank you and I hope it's a winter coming up. Great programming all day. Don't forget my webinar coming up for subscription for my subscribers to my opening call. That's Wednesday a week, the 13th of April on Discord.


Next item of business is topical questions. Our first question comes from Oliver Mundell. Oliver Mundell Cymru To ask the Scottish Government what analysis it made of the reported level of support for independence ahead of the decision to bring forward the referendum bill before article 50 had been invoked. Minister Michael Russell Our starting point remains protecting Scotland's national interest as set phobl yn ysgolwyr i'r ddigest o gwnaes bimbod o bail astudon yn ysgolwyr Cymru ac yn mynd i gael eu gael. Mae Scotllin wedi ymlaen i sgolwyr o amdanoenol yn byw hwnnw i'r gael, ac mae'n deimlo i ddweud i ddim yn dweud y gael a IFF, a'r ddigest yn gallu gweld i ddweud i ddweud yn credu ymlaen i dweud i ddweud. Mae'n ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud ar gyfer o fain grewl o fath, ond mae'n is about the mechanics of the referendum, should we conclude that independence is the best or only way to protect Scotland's interests? I take it from that answer, the real answer is none, but does he agree with me that in pushing ahead with the bill, as the Government plans to do, is its number one priority before even listening to his own party's listening exercise, exposes the SNP's true colours and true intentions, independence at any cost? The Government is listening, engaging and consulting, but it is also acting in Scotland's national interest, and that is what we will do each and every day. That is our day job, standing up for Scotland against a hard right Tory Brexit that will impact on the economy of this country. We will do what is best for Scotland. If you want to talk about opinion poll ratings, that is fine. I welcomed the most recent opinion poll that showed that 51 per cent of people in Scotland would support the SNP and the Scottish Parliament constituency election. That is more than all the political parties in Scotland put together. No wonder that the people of Scotland trust the SNP. If we want to talk about public opinion, why is it that his Government is so keen to ignore the 2 million no-voters who made their intentions crystal clear? Why is it that the SNP is so keen to airbrush out of history the 1 million no-voters in this country more than voted and put their cross next Nicola Sturgeon for First Minister? If he is saying what I think he is saying that this legislation might not be needed, the question is how much taxpayers' money has been spent on the publication and preparation of this bill, and under what illegal authority has that money been spent? It is clear that the Scottish Government has a mandate to consider this. It was clearly outlined in the elections in the manifesto where the SNP secured victory in that election to form the Scottish Government. When Oliver Mundell wants to talk about the cost of policies, does Mr Mundell realise what the cost of Brexit is to the whole of the United Kingdom, as well as Scotland? In terms of respecting this nation, because Scotland is not just a constituency, it is a nation. Every part of this nation, every local authority area voted to remain within Europe, and that is what should be respected by the UK Government. The ball is in the court of the UK Government to respect Scotland and to respect how the people voted. If they do that, then maybe we can find a solution that works for every part of the UK. Here is a Scottish Government that is not just standing up for Scotland, but trying to help the whole of the UK. The UK Prime Minister could react positively and constructively, but first and foremost, respect Scotland's interests and the democracy of this country. To ask the Scottish Government how it will take forward plans for the minimum pricing of alcohol following the decision by the court of session. The Scottish Government intends to implement minimum unit pricing as soon as possible. The order bringing minimum pricing in must first be laid in draft before the Scottish Parliament for approval, before it can be made by Scottish ministers. While we respect the right of the Scottish Whiskey Association to seek permission to appeal the judgment, I hope that it will accept it, enabling us to get on with implementing this life-saving policy. The member will be aware that I am limited in discussing the case due to the Parliament's guidance on subjudice. James Dornan I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer and I am aware of the restrictions placed on her. However, can she tell me what research into the public health benefits of this policy have the Scottish Government reviewed? Minimum unit pricing is underpinned by a wealth of international evidence on the public health benefit, which has been before this Parliament on a number of occasions and before the court. Just today, we have seen the publication of alcohol-related hospital statistics, which show that the rate of admissions remains four times higher than it was in the earlier 1980s, adding further to the need for this life-saving policy, which, as I said earlier, I hope that we can introduce as soon as possible. I thank the cabinet secretary again and the facts that she gave us show the importance of this piece of legislation. I look forward to the drinks industry now respecting the wealth of Parliament and allowing those life-saving measures to be introduced without further delay. However, can the minister outline what other measures the Scottish Government is taking forward in conjunction with minimum pricing to address Scotland's relationship with alcohol? Of course, we have a comprehensive strategy to tackle alcohol-related harm in Scotland. It contains 41 measures, including minimum unit pricing, but other measures include the multi-byte discount ban, which has seen a reduction of 2.6 per cent in consumption. There has been a nationwide programme of alcohol brief interventions, which has delivered more than 667,000 since the introduction back in 2008. We have improved substance misuse education, we have legislated to ban the responsible promotions and, more recently, introduced a lower drink-drive limit. A lot has been done, but we are certainly not going to be complacent and we are working on a refresh of the alcohol framework, which we will introduce soon. Does the cabinet secretary accept that a crucial part of the inner house's judgment was its approval of the provisional or trial nature of the legislation and that the sunset clause that is argued for by the Scottish Conservatives is integral to that? Of course, I respect all the judgment that has been made. I welcome the cross-party support that we have seen for this very important public health measure. I hope that Donald Cameron will join me in hoping that we will now get the opportunity to implement this important life-saving legislation. As I said in my earlier answer, I would hope that the Scottish Whiskie Association will accept the judgment, enabling us to get on with the job of introducing the public health policy, and that all of us will get behind making sure that it works for the people of Scotland.  I thank Kezia Dugdale for raising that important issue. It is sadly the case that Scotland has only relatively recently modernised how our criminal laws operate so that they no longer discriminate against same-sex sexual activity. It is shocking to consider that consensual sex between men was only decriminalised in Scotland in 1980, and the age of consent for same-sex sexual activity was not equalised with sexual activity between men and women until 2001. Thankfully, we can now look back at the operation of these discriminatory laws, knowing that they no longer operate with a sense of pride. Such laws clearly have no place in a modern, inclusive Scotland. However, there are people in Scotland who have criminal convictions for same-sex sexual activity, which is now lawful, and we must right that wrong. Over the summer, I instructed officials to look at the necessary steps that would need to be taken in Scotland to correct that injustice. I can therefore advise the Parliament that we want to introduce an automatic pardon for people convicted so that they know that they are absolved fully of that conviction. We want to address the injustice that people experience simply because of their sexual orientation in circumstances that are now legal, and the granting of an automatic pardon is one way of achieving that. Separately, it is the case that information on those convictions is held on records maintained by Police Scotland, and we have engaged with Police Scotland over the summer to seek views on steps that could be taken to right those historic wrongs. I have therefore instructed my officials, working in partnership with Police Scotland, to determine the practical steps that are required to establish a scheme that will allow men convicted for actions that are now legal to have those convictions disregarded. That scheme will ensure that convictions for activity that is now lawful are removed from central conviction records. Where an offence is disregarded, a person will be treated as not having been convicted of that offence, and so it would not appear on, for example, disclosure checks. I know that Parliament will want to work together to resolve those important issues. That is a hugely welcome announcement. In fact, it is nothing short of a historic moment for Scotland to be a more equal and respectful country. The minister will be aware that there are many men across the United Kingdom who have been prosecuted, convicted and, in some cases, imprisoned for who they are and who they love. A pardon is therefore the very least that the Government of the day can do. Given the significance of that announcement, I hope that you will forgive me for three very quick questions. Can the minister confirm that this would be a blanket pardon for any gay or bisexual man who has been convicted of a crime that is no longer a crime? Secondly, can the minister confirm that no legislation is required for such a pardon and, indeed, that those affected need not apply to be pardoned, as has been argued elsewhere in the United Kingdom? Finally, the Scottish Government is not responsible for those laws, was not responsible for the prosecutions, the convictions or, indeed, the sentences that gay men faced, but they could issue a formal apology, which would go a long way for many people and recognise that they should never have accepted liability for this in the first place. For many men, an apology is as important as a pardon because an apology demonstrates that they should never have been convicted for a crime in the first place. I will try to deal with each of those issues for the member. On the issue of the blanket pardon, it will be an automatic pardon for those offences that are where individuals were convicted for offences that are now lawful. It is important that we have a system in place that also recognises that there were individuals who were convicted using the old criminal law, which are matters that remain criminal offences, so that is why we will create a system that will allow that to happen so that it will take place on an automatic basis for those who were convicted of crimes that are now lawful. For the provision of an automatic pardon, we will require legislation in which to do so. What we will do is seek to bring forward legislation at an early date in this parliament over the course of the next year at the very least to make sure that we make progress in this matter swiftly. With regard to the disregard, that is an issue that we can take forward as a practical policy measure and may not require legislation for its implementation, so we will seek to make progress on that as quickly as possible. I fully acknowledge the issue about the writing of the wrongs of those who were convicted, some of whom were imprisoned as a result of the offences that they were convicted of and which are now lawful. I think that the issue of an apology is an appropriate measure that the Government should give consideration to. In my view, that would be best dealt with in a collective way when we look at bringing forward further legislation in this Parliament on the matter of a pardon. I will certainly give that serious consideration as being part of that package of measures that we will take forward. Can I welcome the question from Ced Dugdale and also the answer from the cabinet secretary very much? Just to reinforce that final point regarding the importance of an apology, does the cabinet secretary appreciate that, while many will welcome a pardon, others take from it an implication that they are being forgiven for having done something wrong? That is not the message that should be sent out, but the Government also has a responsibility to acknowledge that the state is the body that has acted wrongly by enacting laws based on such values that we would regard now as completely immoral. I just reinforce the importance for many people in that situation that the apology comes alongside any pardon so as to ensure that it is not misinterpreted. I recognise the very point that the member has made because the state has been responsible for creating the situation in the first place, but I do believe that the most appropriate way in which to take the matter of any apology forward and to consider the issue of an apology would be alongside any legislation that we intend to bring forward for the introduction of an automatic pardon. However, I recognise the sentiments and the points raised by the member and they will be part of our thinking on how we bring forward the legislation in the coming months. Douglas Ross I associate the Scottish Conservatives with the remarks that have been made. The cabinet secretary will be aware that there is cross-party support for what is being proposed throughout the United Kingdom and indeed in this Parliament, but he will also be aware that the developments down south last week and the case put forward by one of his party members, the issue about the blanket ban was difficult because down south there were concerns that it would cover offences that are still illegal. He mentioned in his second remark to Mr Dugdale about creating a system to ensure that that does not happen. Could he provide Parliament with more information on how he envisages taking that element forward? I welcome the fact that the member has recognised that this is an issue that has got cross-party support. I am sure that the member will also recognise that there was provision in my colleague John Nicholson's bill to deal with the issue of offences that were committed previously that remain criminal offences. I regret the approach that the UK Government has taken on that particular issue. It could have worked harder to ensure that cross-party agreement was achieved on that matter. Setting that aside is that there are clearly offences that were, individuals were convicted on previously under the old criminal law in this area, and what we need to do is to make sure that the pardon arrangements that we put in place make provision so that those individuals continue to have those offences on their record and that they will not receive a pardon. Parliament will be given the opportunity to consider how the legislation seeks to achieve that, while also delivering the automatic pardon to those who are entitled to it to be delivered.


Once again, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls and children of all ages, you are now tuned in to The Prince of Investing right here live in Hololah, Hawaii. Don't forget to hit that like, subscribe, comment, and share button. And as always, I don't have a lot of time, and I definitely, you guys and girls don't have a lot of time, so we're going to jump straight into it. So as you can see in the description box, today's topic, we're going to be describing, we're going to be breaking down AT&T stock versus Verizon stock, also where we think the industry is headed, all the other great stuff, right? So the first thing we're going to do, we're going to do a comparison of AT&T stock versus Verizon stock using fundamental analysis. Now we know there's a difference between fundamental analysis and technical analysis. Technical analysis talks about, you know, where is the stock at today, where is it going to be at tomorrow, more for your day traders, short-term traders. We're looking at long-term fundamentals, and most of the information is based off of the 2018 annual report. Of course, because 2019 annual report hasn't came out, I haven't been able to see the whole picture 2019, so all I can see is 2018's report to make it fair. So we're going to look at things like total revenue, we're going to look at things like dividends, stock of the price, cash flow, net cash flow, taxes, all that great stuff. We're going to break it down, then we're going to compare the two and see what comes out to be a better investment according to the fundamental analysis, okay? So stay tuned. So the first thing we're going to do is we're going to look at total revenue. We're going to look at the total revenue of both companies. So the first thing we're going to do is we're going to look at total revenue of AT&T, 2018 total revenue of AT&T and Verizon.  So total revenue of AT&T is 171 million in 2018, but Verizon has 130 million, right? So total revenue, AT&T has a higher total revenue. That's the biggest thing I'll be concerned about a company is if you had a buddy or a friend that wanted to borrow money from you, you'd be kind of concerned about how much money they make. Well, you don't need to know exactly, but you need to know they have some form of income. If you had a buddy that didn't have a job, but asked you for $500, and it was your last $500, you probably wouldn't give it to them because you probably feel they couldn't pay you back. So one of the top things I want to know is does this person have some type of revenue coming in? So AT&T, 171 million in 2018, Verizon has 130 million, and they were both kind of going at the same pace as far as the last five years. Now I got to look at the expenses, right? Because now that you have a bunch of revenue coming in, now I got to look at the expenses of going out. That's great you're bringing in a lot of money, but I know I have friends that make 10 times more money than I make, but I will have more money than them in disposable income because I live right at or below my means. But then they live over their means. For prime example, they may make $150,000 a year, but then they have $100,000 going out in their lifestyle with, you know, they drive electric cars, maybe tomorrow they drive electric cars, the day they drive electric cars, they go on fancy trips, you know, that's them. But when their money is left over, they probably only have $50,000 a year in disposable income versus you take me, who let's say my household brings in $130,000, but I live off of $50,000, so I have about $80,000 in disposable income. So that's why it's important to see that's great you're bringing in a bunch of money, but how much money is going out once that money comes in. Because I know a lot of people who make $100,000 but have $120,000 going out every year. So anyway, and that's a deficit, something like the U.S. trade deficit, right? But anyway, so we're looking at $144,000,000 in AT&T, $107,000,000 for Verizon. Now when we look at this, you know, when you break out the money that's coming in versus the expenses in 2017, you're looking at operational income was $27,000,000 for AT&T, $23,000,000 for Verizon. So this is telling me the story of, if all the money comes in, if all the money comes out, this is what they're left with or what not, $27,000,000 for AT&T versus $23,000,000 for Verizon. Now we got to look at taxes, you know, you got to pay your taxes. After the taxes, you're looking at about $19,000,000 for AT&T, $16,000,000 for Verizon, right? Now we're looking at net income, which is about $18,000,000, because I'm trying to take out this erroneous charge. I want to go too deep into it. But it's roughly around $18,000,000 and $19,000,000 for Verizon, and not for Verizon for AT&T, $15,000,000 for Verizon. Because now that you bring the money in, you have your, so we're telling the story.  So I'm left with $20,000,000, then after I pay my taxes, this is what I'm left with. So after taxes are paid in 2018, $19,000,000 for AT&T, $15,000,000 for Verizon. So that's the balance sheet. So when I look at the balance sheet, when I look at the balance sheet of 2019 out for 2018, I'm automatically going to look at Verizon, because AT&T is in a better position than Verizon. It's bringing in more total revenue and it's netting in more money on the balance sheets when you compare the balance sheets from 2018. Now we're going to look at things like current asset. This is what we're going to look at the income statements, right? Now we're looking at current assets for AT&T, $51,000,000, current assets for Verizon, $34,000,000, right? These are the current assets. Now we're looking at the total assets for 2018, 53, $531,000,000 for AT&T, $264,000,000 for Verizon. This is all of the assets on 2018. We're still on the balance sheet here for a second. So then we got to look at their liabilities, right? We're looking at 53, $531,000,000 in assets for AT&T, liabilities, $341,000,000,000, $347,000,000. You're left with a network of about 184, shareholders' equity of 184,000,000, when you look at network total shareholders' equity. Now with Verizon, we're looking at 264,000,000 in assets. Then we're breaking down liabilities of 211,000,000, which bringing them of a network of $53,000,000. So they brought in 246, not brought in, but they had 246,000,000 in assets. This is just hard-bodied assets. Then we are looking at 211,000,000 in liabilities. So now we're looking at 53,000,000 in network in 2018. Now when we look at this, going back to what I said earlier, I made a mistake when I was talking about balance sheets at the top, that was income statements of 2018, cash flow. When we was looking at revenue, operating expenses, and after taxes, those was income statements. Then I went on down to the balance sheet to see network. So we're looking at current assets. We're looking at debt. We're looking at a debt of $176,000,000. That was a red flag that I didn't like about AT&T had growing debt of $176,000,000 versus Verizon with $113,000,000. So it said Verizon was doing a better job of managing this debt. Now we're gonna move on down to dividends. Current dividend yield. We know dividend yields can shift depending on the price of the stock. For prime example, if a company's trading for $10 and they pay a $2 dividend, that's what 20% of dividend even though that's crazy. Let's say they're paying 20% of dividend, the dividend yield would be 20%. But if the stock price continues to rise to let's say one of the $20, the dividend yield would drop down to 10%. So according to the price of the dividend, it could change. But current dividend yield for AT&T is 549, I mean, 505.49%. And the current annual dividend for Verizon is 4.14. Now we're looking at market capitalization. Market capitalization for Verizon is 246 billion. Market capital AT&T is 271 billion, right? Now we gotta look at the price of the stock. That's always important, can you afford it? Currently AT&T is $37, Verizon is $59. So we look at the P ratio, then I also looked at the EPS, which is kind of important as well. So now when we look back over, let's look at the current assets and the current liabilities. Current assets for AT&T was 51 million, the current liabilities were 38 million, right? So that roughly left, I didn't do the math on that one. So that roughly left, that's about 13 million. 13 million network, current network, right? Now this was a thing I didn't like about Verizon was a red flag, 34 million. 34 million of current assets, 64 million and current liabilities, putting it at a negative 30 in currents, right? So that's something I didn't like because current gives me a more of a, you know, what's happening right now versus the bigger picture. Now when I look at the AT&T, when I look at the phone service, we all kind of, everybody knows what Verizon AT&T does, the cell phone provider. Now, one of the things I don't like about the cell phones industry, I think the industry is in a bad space. Meaning by that is that I think the industry is going to a space of, I think the industry is going to a space where let's take me for example, I was out in Japan overseas. I don't have an international phone. When I was overseas internationally, what I used and all my friends were using was pretty much things like WhatsApp, we was using Facebook, we can call somebody directly through Facebook, we can call somebody directly through WhatsApp, you can call people through Skype, they had all type of little devices that people were using to take us with water. So when I look at this, I start to think and I start to realize of why am I paying $150, $200 a month for a family package of unlimited cell phone and data when I literally can pick up the phone and call people through any app that I want to.  So why do we pay so much money just for, you know, a phone number? You know, when you can pretty much get a phone number from WhatsApp, if you got, if you have a wifi, you pretty much got a phone. You know, you got wifi, you can download any app, you can do anything you want to do, you can call people, all that good stuff. So when I look at that, I think that innovation will get rid of phones. We won't have cell phone providers as we once knew them. Because let's say if I had wifi access, if I had wifi access, or let's say if I paid my internet, you know, if I had all I needed was wifi access and my phone is completely fine. As long as my phone has an IP address, I should be able to get a phone number and I should be able to text because I can pretty much use Messenger. Facebook, I can text anybody. Instagram, I can text anybody. You know, YouTube, I can get on YouTube. All I need is wifi. So why am I paying 115, you know, whatever the case may be among, just for a cell phone provider? Because literally I can be in my house, turn on my wifi and pretty much use everything on my phone. I can call people through Facebook. They can call me through Facebook. I can call people through Instagram. They can call me through Instagram. I can, you know, text people through, I can DM people from Snapchat, everything. Call people through Snapchat, do Snapchat videos, Instagram videos, live, YouTube live, all of that with just wifi. So what does the cell phone provider really do? Yes, they do give you a phone number or whatever the case may be, but with the influx of apps and what we can do with apps and wifi, you know, it's just getting pretty crazy. So that's why I think that may be a problem in the road in the future. It's like cable and their streaming services. Kind of that same notion how I look at where cell phone providers are kind of, well, we'll be going.  They only watch five, you know, crazy TV all day long and then now, look, you fast forward due to wifi, everybody's streaming for $10 a month, $20 a month and they're getting some of everything. They get in TV shows, movies, everything for $20 a month. That's what I can see happening to the, what you call it, industry, to the cell phone provider industry. I mean, not granted. I'm not a telecommunications person. I'm not in the industry. But I'm just using common sense from the consumer standpoint and looking at innovation.  We're already pretty much almost there. So that's one of the things I kind of worry about the industry, especially with the younger generation, younger generations don't even call each other no more. They rather Instagram you and Snapchat you and DM you on Facebook and watch you on Bob, they rather text rather than call, right? And if they did call you, they wanna do FaceTime, they wanna do video chat. So that's the crazy thing about the world that I see and know, that I may see being a problem going forward. But back to the situation, now we gotta do our final comparison of AT&T versus Verizon and which one I think is the better value for the money that you have to pay. AT&T, we looked at total revenue, AT&T won. When we look at the cash flow, AT&T 2018 had a better, they're bringing in more money than the company, they had way more money left over than the company, they have a higher network than the company, they pay a better dividend, right? The current assets, the current liability ratio is way better. The only bad thing, I didn't like the debt and the growing debt, but their debt wasn't as bad as Verizon. 176 million in debt versus 13 million in Verizon. It's not that far off. I should have broke it down into a ratio and should have broke it down into a percentage. But I'm not that too very overly concerned with AT&T. Another thing is they've had a rising dividend for so many years. Another thing I look at backing, which probably don't mean much, I saw that Vanguard has about 8% in both companies and BlackRock has about 5% in both companies, Vanguard has about 8% in both companies. So they have both companies so they pay great dividends and things like that. When I look at my heart, my heart tells me Verizon. I have Verizon, I have Verizon for the last 12 years. The stock has outperformed AT&T is more innovative. I jumped on to Verizon right when it got the iPhone. And so that was the only thing that made AT&T relevant because it was the only one that had the iPhone. But once Verizon got the iPhone, it grew so I like my heart tells me Verizon but my fundamentals tell me AT&T. It's a greater value company based off of how much money they have managing that debt. It's the only thing I really have in question but it's a higher network and it's only $37. $37 for AT&T versus $59 for Verizon. In the latest book that I'm reading and I learned from the old school people, they tell me the price of a stock versus the value of a stock can get away from each other. Meaning that the value could be here but the price could be down, right? The value could be here, price could be here. The value could be here and the price could be here, right? But it's like a rubber band. You know, when you stretch a rubber band so far, what does it eventually do? Boom, it catches up. When the value is here but the price is here, it's like a rubber band. You know, everybody's just running to it, running to it, we see it running up and everybody thinks like, man, it must be value. But we gotta remember price is what you pay, value is what you get. So the price could be running, the value, the price is running but then over time maybe take a market crash but eventually the price of the stock catches back up the value. So I like to find something that's value is here but the price is here because I buy here and everybody looks over then eventually when people catch on, it does this, making quote unquote value investors very wealthy over a long period of time. So I kind of feel like Verizon is here and its value is up here, right? I feel like AT&T is here and its value is down here. The only people that buy AT&T are like old school people who like to purchase a stock and get that nice pretty dividend. AT&T has been around for so long. I don't even see AT&T doubling itself within the next year, but with the dividends that it pay out, it pays a lot in dividends. You know, when you look at the books, when you look at the fundamentals, fundamentally AT&T is the better value company versus Verizon. That's my overall thing. That's my, so just go back over everything we talked about. We broke down every company, we broke down revenue, current revenue, everything we broke down the fundamentals of each company. We broke down what both companies do, what they're gonna do in the future and which one of you get the better bang for your buck? With 40 bucks, AT&T is a better buy for $37 versus Verizon, which is almost a $60, right? Breaking down the fundamentals. But anyway, that's gonna conclude today's episode. I hope you got something out of that. Leave some comments below telling me what you think. You know, Prince, I think you're crazy. Hey, I think you're right. Or whatever the case may be. So because when the, you know, one last thing I wanna leave you with is hard to tell who's not wearing underwear when the tide is out. But when that tide comes back in, it's very easy to see who's not wearing underwear. In a bullish economy, it's very easy to hide a lot of things when you have cash flow coming in. But one day when the market goes down and money becomes tight, credit becomes tight, you're gonna be able to see who is in a better financial position, okay? All right. Until the next video podcast, cartoon or whatever else you see me doing crazy around the globe. Peace, be safe, I'm out and thank you.


Hey folks, this video will show you how to take Evernote to an even higher level of security by encrypting the text inside your notes. Be sure to watch till the end for a very important opportunity for you, Rod here, and welcome to Burn to Learn! Ever ask yourself, how safe is it to keep all of my information in Evernote? Don't worry, Evernote is safe, but encryption will make it even more secure. Just follow these steps. First, create a note. Now highlight the text you want to encrypt. Right click and select Encrypt Selected Text. Then enter a passphrase. We're using Burn to Learn as our passphrase. Be sure to remember your passphrase because it won't be saved in your PC nor inside the app. You may want to enter a hint to help you remember. Once the passphrase is set, click Confirm and the text is encrypted. And no one else can read your text unless you give them your passphrase. Here are two mighty important reminders. You only can encrypt the text, not the whole note, and if you forget your passphrase, you will lose the text you encrypted. If you liked this video, give us a thumbs up. Now let's show you how you can decrypt the text. Go to the Encrypted Text and right click on it. Select the Show Encrypted Text option. You will be prompted to enter your passphrase. Now you can decrypt the text permanently. Now you know that Evernote keeps all of your information and documents totally secure. We want to know what app you want us to cover next. Tell us what you need training on in the comments below. And don't forget to subscribe to our channel. Thanks for watching! Seven learning tools. One, direct chat with experts for fast answers to your questions. Two, one-on-one coaching to grasp more complex computer skills or needs. Three, an interactive coding platform to teach you coding skills and concepts. Four, an exclusive video library not on YouTube to build your knowledge on many topics. Five, a placeholder that automatically returns to the exact place where you stopped watching. Six, downloadable exercise files to lock in your learning on especially tough topics. And seven, continued access to our free videos on YouTube. So click this button to begin a 14-day free trial. After the free trial, you can join the inner circle for a low price of $9.99 per month. Use your free trial to look around and check us out. Then start learning computer skills on an accelerated basis on Burn to Learn.


Item Number – SCP-5022 Object Class – Safe Special Containment Procedures Until testing is completed, all specimens of SCP-5022 are to be stored in a communal water tank, which is fitted with a water filtration device to ensure containment integrity. For research purposes, a camera system has been set up inside and outside the containment tank to constantly monitor the condition of all SCP-5022 specimens. Description – SCP-5022 is a collective designation for the disembodied heads of 29 children of varying gender and ethnicity, all of which demonstrate the ability to reanimate when submerged in water. When active, SCP-5022 will move around the available area despite the lack of any visible means of propulsion, inspecting any foreign objects in a curious manner. When more than one SCP-5022 specimen is active within the same area, they will interact by crashing into each other at high speeds. The reason for this behavior is unknown. Although all SCP-5022 specimens remain silent when under direct observation, surveillance footage shows that when research personnel are not present, all specimens will giggle and laugh loudly, despite their lack of vocal organs. When removed from water, an SCP-5022 specimen will become inert and cease all signs of life until returned. Addendum 5022-1 Discovery – SCP-5022 was recovered from the home of elementary school teacher Dale Croton on June 21, 2019, following the disappearance of his entire class during school hours. When authorities arrived at his home to question him, Mr. Croton was absent, but all specimens of SCP-5022 were present in a water tank in his garage. During initial containment, agents were dispatched to locate Mr. Croton, finally encountering him as he was attempting to flee the state. Despite attempts at negotiation, a chase ensued, culminating with Mr. Croton driving off the end of the local pier. Inspection of the vehicle showed that he had been killed instantly during the crash, via decapitation. No personal possessions were found in Mr. Croton's vehicle during investigation, save for a water-damaged copy of J. M. Berry's Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens in his breast pocket. On three separate occasions, an SCP-5022 specimen has deviated from his usual pattern of behavior by expelling a large bubble from its mouth. This bubble has then risen upwards through the water, forming words before quickly breaking apart. These messages have been as follows.


Hello, it's Waylon Chow. This is Basic Forms of Business Organization, Module 4a, Part E. In this part, we will look at the remaining key legal aspects of corporations. There are a number of legal rights that come along with being a shareholder. The first is a right to corporate assets that remain after all creditors are paid on the dissolution of the corporation. Another right is the right to vote to elect directors, to appoint auditors, and to approve on proposals. Now, one note to keep in mind is that this right to vote only applies to shares that have voting rights. There is no right to participate in managing the business of the corporation if you are a shareholder. The shareholder's right to vote is exercised at an annual meeting. The corporation is required to hold an annual meeting at least every 15 months. At this meeting, the directors are elected and also an auditor is appointed. The auditor is usually an accounting firm that is responsible for auditing the financial statements of the corporation. At this meeting, the financial statements are also presented and discussed. Now, for corporations with a small number of shareholders, we can dispense with the need to do an annual meeting by just assigning resolutions instead. For public corporations, shareholders can attend the annual meeting either in person or by appointing a proxy. A proxy is usually done by the shareholder filling out a proxy form and indicating how they want their shares voted in terms of who they want elected as director and who's going to be appointed as auditor or any other proposals that are on the table to be voted on at the annual meeting. Now, the way the proxy is given or sent out to the shareholders is by way of a document called a proxy management circular, which is sent out a number of months in advance of the annual meeting. If you have shareholders who disagree with proposals made by management and these shareholders are typically called dissident shareholders, they have the ability to send out a dissident circular to all shareholders for them to consider their views. Shareholders also have a legal right to certain information. They can have access to the articles of incorporation, the corporate bylaws, the minutes of shareholders' meetings and shareholders' resolutions. They can also have access to the share register showing who are the owners of all the shares of the corporation. They also have access or have a legal right to see the audited financial statements of the corporation. Now, with private corporations, the shareholders can unanimously agree to dispense with the audit requirement. So the reason that they would do that is that an audit usually costs quite a bit of money. With a private corporation, it's not legally required to have audited financial statements while with a public corporation, audited financial statements are a must. Sometimes something happens with a corporation that a shareholder disagrees with or it has a negative impact on particular shareholders, especially minority shareholders. Now, what can that shareholder do? What remedies does it have? There are a number of different remedies that are available to a shareholder. The first is called a derivative action. So in a derivative action, the shareholder would sue on behalf of the corporation. It would be suing in the name of the corporation, not the shareholder's name. And it would be suing to seek relief for a wrong that has been done to the corporation. The wrong usually could be either a breach of a duty of care or fiduciary duty by the officers or directors. So we'll talk in more detail about this duty of care and fiduciary duty a little later on. The second remedy that a shareholder may have is called the oppression remedy. Here, this also involves suing in court. With the oppression remedy in contrast to the derivative action, the shareholder sues in their own name, not the corporation's name. So the oppression remedy applies when actions by directors or the corporation have oppressed or unfairly disregarded or prejudiced the shareholder's interest. So that phrase has been interpreted fairly broadly. Now, one way to look at that phrase is that we focus on the reasonable expectations of the shareholders. If the reasonable expectations of the shareholders about the way the company should be run by management have not been met, then the affected shareholder could use the oppression remedy to stop or get damages for that behavior. Some examples of oppressive action. Now, I've mentioned before that what is considered to be oppressive is quite broad. So these are just merely examples of types of behavior that the courts in the past have found to be oppressive. So one example is the approval of a transaction that is lacking a valid corporate purpose that is prejudicial to a particular shareholder. Failure by the corporation and its controlling shareholder to ensure arms length terms for a transaction between them. So if this is referring to, let's say the corporation enters into a deal to sell or buy a certain asset from a controlling shareholder and the price that's agreed to is not a price that normal arms length parties would agree to. In other words, it's not a market price then a minority shareholder could sue using the oppression remedy to stop that transaction. Another example is actions that benefit the majority shareholder but not minority shareholders and also lack of adequate disclosure of information to minority shareholders or any kind of plan that would involve eliminating the minority shareholder. Another remedy available to a shareholder is liquidation or dissolution or another way of describing it is winding up the corporation. So what this involves is a court ordering the dissolution of the corporation. So because it involves basically eliminating the corporation, this is only available in extreme situations such as where we have for example two shareholders who cannot in any way agree on how the corporation should carry on its business. The fourth available shareholder remedy is called dissent and appraisal. So this remedy is available to shareholders who disagree with a fundamental change to a corporation. So a fundamental change could be a major amendment to the articles of a corporation or a sale of most of the corporation's assets. So what this involves is the dissenting shareholder can ask to have their shares bought back by the corporation at their market value. So the drama now continues at Lucy's Lemonade Corp. So with the money and guidance of the Dragons, Lucy's Lemonade Corp expands with locations across Canada and is very profitable. The board of directors controlled by the Dragons decide it is now a good time to take the corporation public by offering to sell one million shares for $10 each to the public and having Lucy's Lemonade Corp shares listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange. Lucy disagrees with this idea. She feels that going public would dilute her percentage ownership of the corporation and thus diminish her ability as CEO to run the business the way she wants. Lucy also feels that the price of $10 per share is too low. What are Lucy's legal options? Please pause the video at this point so that you can consider this question. What are Lucy's legal options? She can use one or more of the available shareholder remedies. The first remedy is the derivative action. Lucy can try to stop the corporation from going public by suing on behalf of the corporation using a derivative action. She would need to argue that number one, the directors did not exercise reasonable care in deciding to go public. In other words, they breached their duty of care and or number two, the directors are not acting in the best interest of the corporation by going public. In other words, the directors are breaching their fiduciary duty to the corporation. For example, Lucy can argue that the directors did not exercise reasonable care in pricing the shares at the low price of $10 and that selling the shares at that price is not in the best interest of the corporation. The second shareholder remedy that Lucy can consider is the oppression remedy. Lucy can sue in her own name using the oppression remedy in order to try to stop the corporation from going public. She would need to argue that as a minority shareholder the plan to go public would unfairly prejudice her interests by diluting her shareholding and diminish her influence over the management of the business. The third remedy that Lucy can consider is dissent and appraisal. So instead of trying to stop the corporation from going public, Lucy can use dissent and appraisal to force the corporation to buy out her shares at Mark Valley. Basically she would be asking to be cashed out and walking away from the corporation. Both the directors and officers owe a fiduciary duty to the corporation. What that means is that they must act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interests of the corporation. Now what is considered to be the best interest of the corporation? The Supreme Court of Canada has said that the best interests of the corporation may be determined by considering the interests of not just the shareholders but also the interests of employees, suppliers, creditors, consumers, governments and the environment. In other words, the Supreme Court is saying that a corporation has to be a good corporate citizen in order to determine what is in the best interests of the corporation. Now what directors and officers are required to do with under their fiduciary duties is that they always have to put the corporation's best interests ahead of their own personal interests. Let's now look at various potential breaches of fiduciary duty. The first is transacting with the corporation. So when a director or officer enters into a transaction with the corporation that they work for, it creates what we call a conflict of interest. The conflict is between the director or officer's personal interests versus the interests of the corporation. So the director and officer's personal interests is to negotiate the best deal for himself and that personal interests conflicts with the director's and officer's fiduciary duty to the corporation which is to get the best deal for the corporation. Now the way that a director and officer can avoid a conflict of interest in this type of situation where they are entering into a transaction with the corporation is to either just to avoid it altogether. Do not enter into any kind of transaction with the corporation that you work for. Or the other way to deal with it is to give full notice or disclosure of the conflict of interest. So if you are a director, you're entering into a contract with the corporation, give full disclosure to the corporation and to the board of the conflict of interest and then excuse yourself from voting on the approval of that transaction or not be involved at all in reviewing or approving that transaction. So by doing that, you avoid that conflict of interest. Another potential breach of fiduciary duty is when a director or officer personally takes advantage of a business opportunity that properly belongs to the corporation. Now when is an opportunity considered to belong to the corporation? A number of factors have been considered by courts as being relevant in determining that. One of those factors is the significance of the opportunity to the corporation. The more significant it is to the corporation's business, the more likely that it will be viewed as belonging to the corporation. Another factor is whether the opportunity was a private one. In other words, was the opportunity publicly advertised or otherwise widely known or was it just known to a small number of people or a small number of corporations. And a third factor that is considered is if the opportunity has not been rejected by the corporation, that's a fact that indicates that the opportunity still belongs to the corporation and the director or officer cannot take personal advantage of that opportunity. And a third potential breach of fiduciary duty is when the director or officer competes on a business level against the corporation that they work for. The rule is that a director or officer cannot compete against the corporation as long as that director or officer is still a director or officer of the corporation. So what that means is that if the director or officer quits or resigns from the corporation, then they're no longer subject to this fiduciary duty and they can compete against the director or officer, subject to whatever non-competition agreements that they may have entered into when they originally were hired as a director or officer. Now a related breach of fiduciary duty is when a director or officer, they may resign and then they go into competition with the corporation. But if in doing that, if they use confidential information that they obtained while they were with the corporation, that could be considered to be a breach of fiduciary duty. A common situation where directors and officers fiduciary duty comes into play is where one company has made a hostile takeover bid of another company. So this usually involves publicly traded companies where one company, without the invitation of what we call the target company, has started trying to buy up a controlling number of shares in order to take control of the target company. Now when that type of situation happens, there is a potential conflict of interest for the directors and officers of the target company. Because in terms of their personal interests, they usually don't want the other company to take over the target company because they'll likely lose their jobs once the company is taken over. But their fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the corporation, the target corporation, could be to support the bid if it's in the corporation's best interest, especially the shareholders' best interest in terms of getting a high price to sell their shares to the acquiring corporation. Now the way hostile takeover bids are dealt with to avoid this conflict of interest, what could be done is to have a committee of independent directors consider the takeover bid. So independent directors are those who have no other connection to the corporation. They are not officers of the corporation, so they are considered to be purely independent. So those that committee of independent directors would consider whether the takeover bid is a good one or a bad one. Let's go back now to Lucy's Lemonade Corp, which is now a publicly traded company on the TSX. So Lucy was unable to stop the corporation from going public. She is still the CEO of what is now a public corporation. There is a new board of directors elected by the new shareholders. Lucy is no longer a director. As CEO, Lucy puts forward a business proposal to the board to enter the market to sell packaged lemonade in grocery stores. That market is currently dominated by companies like MinuteMade and Tropicana. The board rejects the proposal. While still working as the CEO of Lucy's Lemonade Corp, Lucy decides to start her own new company to pursue this business idea. The question is, is Lucy in breach of her fiduciary duty to Lucy's Lemonade Corp? Please pause the video to take a moment to consider this question. So Lucy, as an officer of Lucy's Lemonade Corp, owes a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of that corporation ahead of her own personal interests. So generally, personally pursuing a business opportunity that came first to the corporation would be a breach of fiduciary duty. However, since this business opportunity to sell packaged lemonade was rejected by the board of Lucy's Lemonade Corp, Lucy should be now free to personally pursue this opportunity. In addition, as a matter of caution just to avoid any kind of accusation of breach of fiduciary duty, Lucy should openly disclose the fact that she is pursuing this opportunity outside of the corporation to the board of directors of Lucy's Lemonade Corp. In addition to a fiduciary duty, the directors and officers also owe a duty of care to the corporation that they work for. Now, this duty of care is very similar to the one that we looked at in relation to negligence towards in Module 3.2. This duty of care requires that every director or officer must exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances. Now, more specifically, let's say for a director, this duty of care would include the director having a basic understanding of the business or to acquire that understanding. So if you are hired as a director or appointed as a director for a corporation, you have an obligation to get to know that business in order to be able to properly make decisions regarding that corporation. Another aspect of duty of care is that the director should keep informed about the corporation's policies and its business. The director should regularly attend board meetings. And a director with a higher level of knowledge or experience, let's say if you work, if you're a director for a mining company and you happen to be a geologist, you are held to the higher standard of knowledge and experience that you have as a geologist and therefore you have to meet a higher standard of care because of that. In applying this duty of care to directors and officers, the courts have clearly said that it will not second guess the business decisions of directors and officers where they have acted reasonably and the decision was within the range of reasonably available alternatives. So this is called the business judgment rule. So in effect it's saying that we don't expect directors and officers to have a crystal ball and to absolutely be perfect in making their decisions. But we only expect them to act reasonably and make a decision within the range of reasonably available alternatives. So one thing I'd like you to think about is if the company called or used to be called Research in Motion, which is now called Blackberry a couple of years ago, they decided to come out with their own tablet called the Blackberry Playbook to compete against the Apple iPad. So the Blackberry Playbook failed miserably. So the query did the directors and officers of Research in Motion exercise their duty of care in deciding to compete against Apple by producing the Blackberry Playbook tablet. So give that some thought on your own. So back at Lucy's Lemonade Corp. So let's say instead of rejecting that proposal to sell packaged lemonade through grocery stores, the board of Lucy's Lemonade Corp actually did approve that proposal. However, this business venture turns out to be a resounding failure due to the dominant companies in this market. It was very difficult for Lucy's Lemonade Corp to get shelf space in grocery stores as well. Manufacturing the packaged lemonade with the same taste as the lemonade sold in the stores proved to be much more difficult than anticipated. The packaged lemonade tasted sour and had a bad aftertaste. Question is, did the officers and directors fulfill their duty of care to Lucy's Lemonade Corp in approving this proposal to market the packaged lemonade? Please pause this video so you can consider this question. So did the officers and directors fulfill their duty of care to Lucy's Lemonade Corp? We would need to find out whether or not the directors and officers exercise their due diligence in investigating and planning this business venture to market packaged lemonade. So we need to ask, did they investigate how to get shelf space in grocery stores? Did they conduct taste testing of the packaged lemonade? Did they investigate various packaging and manufacturing processes? Those are only a few examples of the types of questions that we would need to look into to determine whether or not the directors and officers exercise due diligence. Although a court will be reluctant to second guess the business judgment of the directors and officers under the business judgment rule, it will still assess whether they acted reasonably and within the range of reasonably available alternatives.


Hello everyone, my name is Amit Don of Adon Journal. Today I'll talk about why you should not rely on best credit card ratings done by personal finance websites or magazines. I'll use Mani Sense 2015 Best Credit Card Ratings for Canadians as an example. The factors that are used to determine the best credit card ratings may not necessarily match your own circumstances. For example, assumptions made that you'll be using $2,000 per month on credit cards. However, in order to spend that much money on credit cards, you need to make approximately $100,000 to $150,000 per year, which may not be the case for most credit card users. If you look in the travel category, the top two credit cards for 2015 are the WestJet RBC World League MasterCard and the American Express Gold Rewards Travel Card. The problem with these two cards are that they do not offer major elements to be considered the first and second top-best credit cards. For example, both of these credit cards are missing the trip cancellation insurance and concierge services. Also, the top one card in this category, WestJet RBC World League MasterCard, restricts you to fly only WestJet covered by destination only where WestJet flies. And let's move to the second retail rewards category. The worst picks are actually in this category. For example, if you look at the top five cards in the retail rewards based credit cards for 2015, these cards are not even able to compete in ratings done by other websites or magazines. For example, the number one retail rewards credit cards in Canada is Roger's MasterCard. Really? In order to use this card, you have to use Roger's services and for most of the credit card users, that's not an option. So now the question is, how to pick the best reward credit cards? Instead of go by one rating, look for all ratings and also gather information by going to credit card providers on websites. And also on Aidan Journal, there are tools, calculators and articles to help you with your research and pick the best rewards credit cards based on your own circumstances and which gives you the most benefits. Not because, don't pick anything, just because one website is telling you that these are the best credit cards to pick. That's all for today. Thank you.


Hello friends, welcome to the session. I am Malka and we are going to discuss matrices if a which is our first matrix is 2 by 3 1 5 by 3 1 by 3 2 by 3 4 by 3 7 by 3 2 2 by 3 and a second matrix Which is b is 2 by 5 3 by 5 1 1 by 5 2 by 5 4 by 5 7 by 5 6 by 5 2 by 5 then we have to compute 3a minus 5 b So now let's start with the solution From our question we see that we have to calculate 3a and minus of 5 b So first of all let us calculate the value of 3a Now we know that a equal to 2 by 3 1 5 by 3 1 by 3 2 by 3 4 by 3 7 by 3 2 and 2 by 3 and the value of b equal to 2 by 5 3 by 5 1 1 by 5 2 by 5 4 by 5 7 by 5 6 by 5 2 by 5 now we'll calculate the value of 3a So therefore 3a Equal to 3 multiplied by the matrix a 3 multiplied by 2 by 3 1 5 by 3 1 by 3 2 by 3 4 by 3 7 by 3 2 2 by 3 will give us This is equal to 3 Multiplied by 2 by 3 3 multiplied by 1 3 multiplied by 5 by 3 Similarly, we'll write for the second row and for the third row This is equal to 2 3 5 1 2 4 7 6 2 Now we'll calculate the value of 5b On multiplying 5 with the matrix B. We get 5 into 2 by 5 5 into 3 by 5 5 into 1 and similarly for second and third row This is equal to 2 3 5 1 2 4 7 6 2 Now we'll calculate minus 5b therefore minus 5b equal to minus 2 minus 3 minus 5 minus 1 minus 2 minus 4 minus 7 minus 6 minus 2 Now we'll calculate the value of 3a minus 5b Which is equal to 3a plus minus 5b Now on substituting the value of 3a and minus 5b We get 2 3 5 1 2 4 7 6 2 plus minus 2 minus 3 minus 5 minus 1 minus 2 minus 4 minus 7 minus 6 1 minus 1 This is equal to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Therefore the value of 3a minus 5b equal to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


What's up everybody, Jason here for jaspyscasebrace.com. 2022, Panini Prism Baseball, just sold out. This is a six box half case break, two random teams each number two. Brand new release from yesterday. 15 total spots, everybody gets two random teams, all cards shipped, look for three autographs, three silver prisms, four blue prisms, and five red prisms per box on average.  Let's click dice roll. We got ourselves a five and a three eight times, good luck. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Eight times, five, three, eight. Brett down to Chris Maxwell, five, three, eight. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Eight times, five, three, eight, eight. Giants down to the Yankees. All right, so Brett, you have these San Francisco Giants, Michael L with the Cubs, Travis with the Red Sox, John with the Rays, Brett with the Dodgers, Tanner with the Marlins, Joshua with the White Sox, Travis with the Cardinals, Joshua with the Padres, Terry with the Orioles, Chris with the A's, Mark with the Blue Jays Brewers, Chris with the Astros, Tanner with the Mariners, Terry with the Royals, Michael with the Rockies, Joshua with the Pirates, Travis with the Tigers, Brian with the Nationals, Chris Walker with the Diamond Bags, Michael with the Mets, Travis with the Phillies, Michael with the Rangers, Joshua with the Twins, Brian with the Angels, Chris with the Guardians and Braves, Joshua with the Reds, and Chris Maxwell with the Yankees. Now of course, if anybody does wanna trade, I'll give you guys a quick minute. If not, trade window close and we'll just stick to what you got. All right, no trades, guys. All right, guys, TWC. So here we go, guys. So again, these are all just base colors now. So unless it's like a bigger blue rookie or something like that, then most likely we're gonna leave it unsleaved or touched. Of course, this is numbered. Marcus Strowman to 149. Illuminations, Stargazing, Ryan Fultner, little base mosaic, stained glass. Again, the blues are also not numbered. You get a ton of those. First autograph is Calmola for the Atlanta Braves. That old school. And we got Kevin Smith for Toronto to 50. And we got a Brian de la Cruz for Miami to 149. Illuminations, this is the number of Cedric Mullins for Baltimore. It's gonna tarry to 199. And we got a Rosni Contreras. Is this four autographs? We're supposed to only get three. So we have four autographs in this box for Pittsburgh. Joshua Lowe. And we got Videl Bruhan, number to 60. All right, first box. Let's go to an extra auto in this box. So there you go, four autos. Let's go to the next one. All right, next box guys, here we go. Giovanni Morgan. We got a Yanni Hernandez, number to 99. Ryan Vellade, Ricky Glass, Bryce Harper, red. We got for the reds to 149. Kyle Muller for Atlanta. And Alex de Gotti, that is for Houston to 50. We got Bryson Stott and another Brian de la Cruz, number to 75. And Rosni Contreras. Is this the same box that we got for the last one? I feel like it's exactly the same autos to 149. And I want to say it gave us four autos on this one too. The Juan Soto, number to 75. I think it literally gave us the same autos. So Rosni Contreras is a Cruz. That one's probably different. Kyle Muller for sure. So Kyle Muller, Kevin Smith is a random. It gives us three out of the four the same. This one had more color though right there, look it. Three out of the four were the same. These two were the only other different ones. And then like I said, Chris numbered all these 222, I think you know this was the second half. So good for the same three teams though. And we've been getting an extra auto in every box. We're only supposed to get three. So either some boxes are gonna be missing some or we're just gonna get a lot of extra. Looks like we got some snake skins coming out of this box. All right, here we go, next box. These are not numbered. Luis Frias is though, number to 75. We got a Matt Manning to 35 little snake skin. That's for Detroit, which that is Travis. Mookie Beds Fearless looks really nice. Cody Poteets for Miami. Steven Kwan for Cleveland. And a Ronald O'Cunha Jr. Fearless numbered for Atlanta to 99. Also two guys, sorry, I don't know if I ever showed the whole list, but. And Atlanta's gonna Chris Walker. And a rookie class gold for Cincinnati, that's very nice. Two of 10. And another Rodolfo Castro. That's our third auto in the studio. Oh no, that was Rosnick and Cheris. This is Rodolfo Castro, sorry. 21 out of 35, a different one. Pirates going to Joshua Jones. A lot of ours over there. We got a Carl Yastrimsky, 249. Alrighty. Halfway through guys. Bobby Wood Jr., that's a nice little rev. So remember, these aren't numbered, but nice one there. Let me look at, we got a green stained glass. Tatees, number to 125. Wander Franco, rookie class, little silver. And a Jaren Duran, rookie autographs for Boston. That's going to Travis. Little Yard on Alvarez, 275. Gavin Sheets, Spencer Strider. And a Domingo Acevedo for Oakland, going to Chris Walker. Ken Gravey Jr., tier three. Must be a short one maybe. Karthi and a Jake Berger. Rookie autograph there, 249 for the White Sox. Going to Joshua. Jose Altuve for Houston, 200. And then I bought a Juan Soto blue stained glass for Washington, going to Brian Kay. Alrighty guys, quickly just talk about these ones here. Two boxes left guys. For the price point, I don't think so big, Rigg.  But those box prices are also, you know, thousands of dollars a box, you know? This is only like 150 a box or something crazy like that. So to be honest, to get all the colors, everything like that. I mean, I just think people hate the non-officially licensed, but I mean, I think this is a great buy for the price point, honestly. It's really not too bad. You just haven't hit any of bigger names. But for a box that's under $200, three or four autographs potentially, I don't really buy into the whole, oh well it's not MLB licensed so don't want to buy into it, you know? Still the same autographs and all that and you get some good colors here. And we got Alex de Gaulty, number to 50. We got Curt Cutter Crawford. I mean, yeah, these prison basketball prices, these prison basketball prices or prison baseball prices are honestly the prices that prison basketball used to be back in the day in prison football. Edward Olivares, nobody kind of wanted this. And then all of a sudden everybody wanted it. Now of course with baseball it's a little different because they're not officially licensed, but you're honestly getting more color and more autographs than this than you are in like Topps Chrome. You really want to compare the flagships type of deal. Dylan Coleman, and you're saving about half the box price. Colton Welker, and we have been averaging about four autos of box too. Mike Bauman. But again guys, yeah, just, you know, don't think that, you know, obviously I'm saying this is such a great buy, you're going to make a ton of money off of this. It's just, you know, it's just this is just the way it is, you know, it's unofficially, not officially licensed sport. So they're not going to resell for as much as to say Topps stuff is. But like I say, if you pull a one or Franco autograph out of this, it's the same auto you're going to get in a Topps product, you know. We've done what, five boxes so far? One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. We've done five boxes already, right? We have 20 autographs so far. So we've been averaging four autos of box. Coolio buddy, that was probably going to come up next anyways. That and the spectra filler, so. Most likely be the next break. Dude, my buddy and I back in the day, 2012 was the year I got into the hobby. We were buying Flawless 2012, 13 for like, I think four or $500 a box. Flawless 2012, 13. Think of that. Now go see what Flawless 2012, 13 boxes go for. Now that's the first year that they had created it, I believe, and they didn't have any diamonds. They didn't have local man's, but that was a double drop cost though. I think even up until like 2018 or 2019, Flawless boxes were still only like under a thousand. JD Martinez, Monterey Pugna, Fearless, and a Videl Bruhan, a little bit of a teaser. That's for Tampa Bay, Josh, elimination there. We got Miguel Yajur, a lot of autographs for Pittsburgh, that's great. Hunter Green, and Juan Yves for the Nationals, Brian Kay. We've got a crazy color coming up. I thought I'd seen something that looked a little weird. Couldn't be wrong though. Michael Strabsky, tripping out. Aaron Ashby, from Milwaukee, Milwaukee's Mark, and then Rafael Devers, to $199. So I'm assuming, I don't know what was hitting the first half, there was probably some bigger rookie names maybe. Didn't really catch too many here though, but we did get an extra autograph pretty much in every box. So instead of getting 18 autos, I think we ended up getting what, 24? We'll take that, right? We love it when they give us extra autographs. But again, you got all this color, of course, coming out to those customers there. Everything does shift. I'll top all of these autographs here, but let's say we got another four right here. So yeah, 24 autos total in six boxes, so. There you go, guys. So again, I think we can run back another random teams break. I'm pretty sure we have more cases. I just got to double check. But we do have that Picker team in a pack filler. That's a 12 box case break. Only like 19 bucks, so you have a chance to win like a $100 team like the Yankees. Dodgers in there for 80 bucks. Chief's team is like spot prize. Like, I think the worst team is like $20. So, you know, everybody that gets a team there will pretty much make their money back on that pack filler investment. So, appreciate you guys. Jasper'scasebricks.com, guys, thanks.


Hi everyone, Sean with jaspyscasebreaks.com. You're doing 2021 Panini Prison Draft Picks Football, one box break, random pack number five, or sorry, 35, where five spots, five packs, typically randomize the name of the customers, match those up with the pack number, and they obviously get to open up those packs for those customers to get all the cards inside of them. But tonight, you do not need to do that because Bennett bought all the spots himself. So this is a personal box for Bennett. So no randomizing necessary. He gets all of them, so let's just make sure it's a good box for him. Looking for a quarterback auto. Still haven't seen any big quarterbacks or any quarterbacks auto, I don't think out of these boxes so far. So good luck Bennett, this is yours. Full box for you. The auto was like three feet, two feet away from another home run. And it's Jermar Jefferson out of 75, blue, ice, rookie auto. Cam Newton Redway, Matthew Stafford, blue to 199 out of Patrick Sertain, silver. Zach Wilson and Najiaris, did they win though? Literally like two feet away. Probably good for him that he's over. That way he doesn't try to swing for home runs. 10 parts that would have been a home run. Tyson Campbell to 199, cornerback out of Georgia, is your second rookie auto. Nice Zach Wilson Redway there. Phillip Rivers, Felipe Rios, red to 299 and Dak Prescott Silver. Cadarius Tony and Jermar Chase. So we're getting the good names again. Is this a double pattern? They're just showing, now they're showing the actual game instead of just Joey Votto's non-home runs today. Darrell Henderson and Adam Thielen. Jason Oway, defensive end out of Penn State, is the next rookie auto. Todd Gurley, Red Wave and Joshua Kelly. Purple ice to 149, Sean Wade Silver, another Jemar Chase for you as well. Jordan Love, second year. Thailand Wallace, rookie auto prism or hyper, that's a wide receiver out of Oklahoma State and a nice Trey Lance, Red Wave. Jeremiah Owosu-Karamo to 199, Blue and Jerry Judy Silver, Justin Fields. Okay, one pack left, come on, quarterbacks. You've been in these packs, wouldn't need you to be in the auto. Or at least like a black gold or gold or something really low numbered for Bennett. Good luck Bennett, last pack. It's Warren Jackson, a wide receiver out of Colorado State to 149. Let's see if we can get you a quarterback numbered low numbered. Terry McClurrin, Red Wave, Michael Carter, Blue Wave to 249 and Rakeem Boyd Silver. And there you go Bennett, thank you very much for giving it a shot. Still no big quarterbacks. Or I don't think quarterbacks at all actually. In the prism, draft picks, autographs. So we've got another box coming up. I will load one more for tonight at least. If it tells us, I'll take a look and see. I think we have another one maybe we can do, but we'll see. There you go guys, that was the break. Thank you very much Bennett for getting in on that. That was 2021 Panini and Prism draft picks football one box break, random pack number five from jaspyscasebreaks.com. I'm Sean, jaspyscasebreaks.com. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you next time.


What's up everyone? It's your girl Kenzie here from Layton Sports Cards, and I'm ripping up personal here for Bradley R We've got a 2022 tops finest Star Wars hobby box. All right best of luck here, Bradley Just one second and we will get to ripping for ya. I Have no order number for that Jennifer. Um, you said Dave and out. This is Layton Sports Cards This is not Dave and Adams. Is there a different order number? Possibly because I don't have anything for that order number Yeah, this is Layton Sports Cards All right, here we go Bradley Top finest Star Wars All right, Bradley. Let's see. Let's see a sketch. I don't think I pulled a sketch out of here yet. Good luck You and that Refractor of Barris O'Faye We've got refractor of Kelly Motto Obi-Wan Kenobi Forrest and Sam and them must sit a little bit higher than me. The camera's always pointed up a little bit Got refractor from the bad batch of Ketch Ren, down here, a Mandalorian of Valin Hess And auto a Lyra Urso Lyra Urso is gonna be your first auto there for you Bradley We have refractor of Mon Mothma and Gold 22 of 50 of general pride nice gold to start us off I love gold Do you see the red baby Yoda that was for Bradley? Refractor Yoda speaking of He said he reached out to the lady on the artist on Instagram you know to get more Background information. She actually like wrote him back. Yeah, it was really cool. Yeah refractor the Mandalorian Yeah Urso refractor of touch tech Uh greens and 99 Yoda a little color match their skin color match on that one Man Bradley's a Yoda magnet here Magnet Yoda he is 52 out of 99 Yeah, it's some Star Wars jokes. Even though I've never never watched All right, come on sketch for the second one I've only watched the one from back in day.  He said he was feeling lucky yesterday when he ordered this to there you go That is awesome. Congrats on that Bradley go with your colored Star Wars Collection will mag this one for you. That is nasty a Fennec shand on the Boba Fett refractor and Urso. All right Bradley that'll do it for your box Congrats again, and we'll get these right out to you