Thank you. Thank you very much. So we go to the next, to the third presentation by Karine Walther who is an associate professor of history at Georgetown University in Qatar. And she doesn't have a PowerPoint presentation. Yeah, I, well first of all, I didn't have a PowerPoint because I realized what time this was going to be at and I figured many of you would be napping and I didn't want to get you all excited with my images. So as soon as I'm done, you can all wake up and listen to Hannah. So I'd like to begin by thanking the organizers for the conference. It's such a rare opportunity to present to experts in this area of the world, although it's as an Americanist who's also always viewed and researched Mindanao from the outside in. It's also a bit daunting, so apologies in advance. So let me begin. In January of 1900, an issue of the Southern workmen published out of the Hampton Institute printed a letter by one of its former African-American students, J. H. Walker, which linked the mission of the Hampton Institute to the American Imperial Project Abroad. Before I get to the letter, let me give you a bit of background on the Hampton Institute. The Institute was founded by the Child of American Missionaries in Hawaii, Samuel Chapman Armstrong in 1868 after the Civil War and was designed primarily to offer industrial education to newly emancipated African-Americans. Armstrong had been raised in Hawaii where his father had it had introduced industrial education into the Hawaiian school system in the 1830s and 40s, first as an American missionary then as the Minister of Public Education. As a child, Armstrong had accompanied his father on school visits and was taught to appreciate the value of industrial education for people of color. Views he introduced at the Hampton Institute when he served as its first president. Indeed, Armstrong adopted his father's approach of instituting industrial education among Hawaiians to African-Americans with the belief that people of color were best suited for manual labor rather than intellectual pursuits. By 1900, the Hampton Institute was also accepting Native American students. It had served as a model for Native American industrial boarding schools including the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, which many of you may be familiar with, which opened in Pennsylvania in 1891. One of the African-American graduates of the Hampton Institute, Booker T. Washington, would also apply similar views to his own school, the Tuskegee Institute, which he founded in 1881 based on the Hampton Institute model. So coming back to the issue of the Southern workmen, in 1900 the former graduate walker noted in his letter to the journal that he was currently in Hawaii with his military regiment. Walker's letter reveals important ties between the industrial education systems present across the varied racial landscapes of American Empire and hinted at the complicated ways in which American imperial subjects and people of color could identify with each other across imperial boundaries. I say hinted because clearly Walker would never have been allowed to critique the very system under which he was educated, nor would have been allowed to critique American imperial expansion either in Hawaii or the Philippines to a journal that was heavily supportive of both. And yet if we read through the lines, his letter nonetheless offers us some hints as to these critiques. Speaking of the Hawaiian subjects he had met, Walker noted, quote, they are fond of the color people and claim to have the same blood as we in America, of course meaning African-Americans. They invite us to their houses and entertain us royally. They talk very intelligently about the over-throw of their government by the Americans and about the future of the islands. Walker then hinted at the ways in which the American government instrumentalized people of color by enlisting them to fight an American Imperial warfare, while addressing the very stereotypes that had pushed white Americans to open industrial schools for Hawaiians and African-Americans back in the United States, which included the alleged laziness and dishonesty of people of color. He wrote, quote, there are a number of Hampton students in our regiment, the 49th Infantry, and they are noted for their strictness, promptness, and truthfulness. There are also some Tuskegee boys here. I leave tomorrow for the Philippines. Scholars have already noted the sharp critiques that many African-Americans expressed regarding American Imperial expansion in the Philippines and the racialized justifications that accompanied it. Walker's letter offers us implicit clues about this critique. As a graduate of the Hampton Institute, he was part of an educational system that maintained that African-Americans were not worthy of or prepared for higher learning, and that what they really needed was an industrial education that would prepare them to continue to labor for whites in the American South. As I hope to demonstrate today, these views became explicitly connected to American education in Mindanao. My talk today focuses on the expansion of industrial education to the Philippines and more specifically to Moro's and its connections to American Imperial education more broadly. I argue that to truly understand American colonial officials' attempts to educate Moro's, we must understand the ideas policy makers, educators, and colonial officials brought with them to the islands. Indeed, the policy of introducing industrial education to the Philippines had deep roots in American history and the country's experience with previous Imperial subjects, which for the purpose of my argument I include as Native Americans, Hawaiians, and African Americans. Walker's letter was not the only reference the Philippines made in the pages of the Southern workmen. Five months later, the journal proudly noted that Fred Atkinson, the newly appointed General Superintendent of Education in the Philippines, had visited the Hampton Institute, quote, for the purpose of observing its methods of dealing with backward races, end quote. Atkinson had been instructed to visit Hampton Institute as well as the Tuskegee Institute and the Carlisle Indian Industrial School by the first civil governor of the Philippines, William Howard Taft. The American government also specifically requested that two white teachers from the Hampton Institute be sent to newly opened schools in the Philippines. Indeed, American colonial officials were inspired by such schools that put forward the principle of what one scholar has described as, quote, agricultural training, political conservatism, and limited educational aspirations. Pointing to other ways in which imperial education shaped American colonial attitudes towards education in the Philippines, Taft had also recommended that Atkinson read a copy of the British scholar Charles Trevelyn's 1838 study entitled On the Education of the People in India. Atkinson had been recommended to Taft by Harvard President Charles Elliott. Although church and state were officially separated in American governance of the Philippine Islands, in interviewing Atkinson, the latter recalled that Elliott had specifically asked him what church he belonged to. When Atkinson replied that he was part of the congregational church, Elliott responded, that settles it, you must go. Atkinson's visit to Hampton Tuskegee and Carlisle convinced him that a similar method of approach often termed the Hampton Tuskegee idea would make sense for the Philippines as he explicitly noted, quote, the education of the masses here must be agricultural and industrial one after the pattern of our Tuskegee Institute at home. Links between domestic racial issues and the Philippines would emerge again and again as American colonial officials sought to design education policies for Filipinos. These ideas also continued to emerge from white Americans who worked for these three institutes. In the same issue of the Southern Workmen, which I referenced above, another author noted in his article, quote, which was entitled Our New Possessions and Open Door, that the Civil War, the Cuban War and the Philippine War furnished, quote, striking coincidences along several lines, not the least important of which is that in each case, a serious consideration of the dark races of the world forms a prominent feature. In these three cases, he noted, the uplifting of the darker races has been and is still one of the first things calling for consideration at the close of the three wars. So again, we get the benevolent American Empire talk. And here he says white American educators had a special role to play in, quote, advising the proper direction of schoolwork, which includes suggestions as to the establishment of manual training schools or even better, special trade schools. He encouraged in particular, sending educated African Americans to the islands to take on the work of teaching Filipinos in industrial education. Booker T. Washington himself would also praise the benefits of industrial education in Cuba and the Philippines, stating that it would solve the problems facing American colonial officials, much as it had begun to address problems in the South. And this goes back to the links between the Moro and the, quote, Negro problem, as it was described at the time. Although American educators and colonial officials recommended industrial education for all Filipinos, including Christians, the policy was particularly encouraged among non-Christians. In the first decade of American colonial rule, however, the extension of public education in the Philippine islands focused primarily on Christian Filipinos, in large part because of the ongoing tensions and violence between Moros and the American military. This distinction between Christian and non-Christian, as you're all well aware of, was part of a broader American colonial policies. With regards to education, the distinction was made explicit in 1903 when public education, Mindanao, was officially separated from the educational governments in the North, and placed under the leadership of the Syrian American, Najib Salibi. Although industrial education was also encouraged in the North, colonial officials emphasized that what was necessary in these schools was, as Taft put it, to place Christian Filipinos, quote, in a state of Christian pupillage where they would be ready for self-governance and Republican training. In the first decade, as I just mentioned, American officials placed less emphasis on instituting public education in Mindanao and Sulu, although they did open two industrial schools in 1902. One in Zambolenga and one in Jolo. Corresponding to wide reviews held by American colonial officials about the proper way to deal with the Moros, the 1902 report of the Philippine Commission noted that Moros' religious views were so hostile and entrenched that they were so convinced of their superiority and power in comparison to Americans that, quote, the education of the Moro must therefore follow his awakening to an appreciation of his feebleness as contrasted with the powers of a civilized nation. Given what we know about the violent military strategies that Americans had already and would continue to employ in their attempts to control these areas, we all know what kind of education would ensue. That's the alarm clock, yeah. They have time. It was clearly not the kind that would take place within the four walls of a school. This was explicitly acknowledged by American colonial officials in 1903 where they noted their reports and note the euphemistic language here that downplays the violent aspects of the struggle, quote, the misunderstandings between the Americans and the Moros and the resulting stress which caused so many of the latter to lose their reason and run a mock at Jolo and Jolo during this period, naturally militated against the success of educational work at that place. Nonetheless, the same report explicitly noted how American officials should approach education for the various populations of the Philippines. A division superintendent, the superintendent noted in his report, could be divided into education, quote, in letters, into letters, or entirely outside of letters. For Moros, like for other non-Christians, the last option was deemed the most appropriate. Nonetheless, the opening of two industrial schools also drew in the expertise of Americans who had previously experienced with Muslims, just as Najeeb Salibi was deemed an expert in moral affairs in part due to his Syrian origins. In 1902, Atkinson appointed another American, Emerson Christie, to head the industrial school in Zamboanga. Christie was born in Turkey to missionary parents who had witnessed the Armenian massacres and held a deep antagonism for the Islamic faith. Perhaps in line with such attitudes, Emerson Christie noted in an article he wrote for the Congregationalist in 1902 that he was embarking on, quote, the first chapter in the story of a modern crusade. This prompted American colonial officials to open, so similar ideas also prompted American officials to open a Moro exchange, as Oliver noted, whereby Moros would be taught the benefits of American governance and capitalism when given the opportunity to sell their items in local markets. Despite such efforts by 1913, efforts to establish schools in Mindanao remained modest and limited finances were attributed to the effort. The situation pushed American missionary Charles Brent to open his own private schools in 1914. Brent had been working as a missionary in the Philippines since 1901 and he began to focus his endeavors primarily on non-Christians. Brent's endeavor was accompanied by a fundraising mission entitled the National Committee for Upbuilding the Wards of the Nation, which sought to establish schools that would merge the evangelical, industrial, and educational pursuits of American missionaries in the islands. As a pamphlet advertising, Brent's project argued with the right education and training, Moros were capable of advancement and the adoption of the fruits of capitalism. As it noted, quote, For instance, in one section families who were dwelling in tree tops two years ago now have comfortable homes in decent villages and are cutting their grass with American lawn mowers. The telephone, telegraph, sewing machine, automobile, railroad, artesian well, farming tools, and other modern inventions are increasingly welcomed and used by the natives who are not devoid of intellectual capacity and have considerable manual dexterity. The mats and beadwork of the women, the brasses and woodwork of the men display artistic ability and have real intrinsic value even in their crude state. As demonstrated by this quote, the value of teaching Moros to engage in industrial labor went hand in hand with the use of American industrial products which played to the initial claims of justifying the annexation of the islands based on the expansion of American markets to Asia. But to do this, Moros needed to be trained to adopt such values from their birth. For this reason, Brent's educational project also adopted the principle of the Native American boarding schools back home emphasizing that to truly save Moro children in the majority of cases Moro children needed to be separated, not caged, just separated from their parents at an early age. As Brent noted in 1915 in an article entitled quote, giving the Moro Americans a chance, if an entire Moro family was capable of change it was possible to leave children at home, quote, otherwise take him from the hovel where he lives, put him in a dormitory under the supervision of competent teachers and give him a minimum of literary and a maximum of industrial training. Indeed, as Brent argued in the same article, quote, a wave of hopelessness sweeps over one when confronted by a mass of Moro or pagan adults but is not so with the children. They are as impressionable, as appealing, as lovable as any children of color in the world. Not any children, any children of color, to specify. Brent's efforts to open schools for Moros received the praise of American colonial officials at the highest levels and his industrial schools would continue in the following decades, even after his death in 1929. Indeed, in 1939, the 25th anniversary of the founding of Brent's Moro School gathered some of the most important political and religious elites of the time, including John Mott, Robert Speer, Frank McCoy, Cameron Forbes, and of course, John Pershing. The introduction of industrial education for Moros should be read within a wider lens of American imperial education that emphasized that American colonial subjects abroad and people of color at home should be trained to serve and work for the racialized American state and not be offered the kinds of intellectual training that would result in dangerous ideas about equality and freedom that would challenge American empire abroad and white racial dominance at home. The dangers of higher educational training had already been demonstrated by intellectuals such as W. E. B. Du Bois. Just as Du Bois and other intellectuals of color would link civil rights in the United States with colonialism abroad, limiting the educational reach of Moros to the benefits of capitalism and labor was deeply enmeshed within the American education system in the southern Philippines, as well as, of course, the political economy, as Oliver just stated. Just as it had been for decades for Hawaiians, African-Americans, and Native Americans in other portions of the American empire. Thank you very much. Thank you.


Hello, and welcome to the session in which we would look at exchanges of non-monetary assets. This topic is covered on the CPA exam, as well as in your accounting courses. If you're studying for the CPA exam, I strongly suggest you check out my website, farhat-lectures.com. On my website, you will find additional information, whether it's multiple choice through false CPA questions or notes, that's going to supplement not to replace if you have Wiley, Glyme, Roger or Becker. Keep your courses. I don't supplement them. I can add 10 to 15 points. Now, how do I do that? If you understand the material better, and that's what I do, I teach the material versus those courses, they review the material. They assume you know the material. I don't assume anything. I assume you know nothing, and I will start from scratch, and I will build that knowledge. Once you build that knowledge, you would use your CPA course to really, really, really do very well on the CPA exam. And this is how I can increase your score. Also, if you're taking other accounting courses, including intermediate accounting, check out my website for additional resources. Connect with me on LinkedIn and check out my LinkedIn recommendations. Like my lectures, share it. It doesn't cost you anything. If my lectures are helping you by sharing with others, you'll be helping others as well. Connect with me on Facebook and Instagram. So let's talk about what is exchanges of non-monetary assets. What we are exchanging is assets that's non-monetary in nature. What is non-monetary? It means no money. No money is involved. Or we're going to find out if there is money, it's a small amount of money. Or what does that mean? It means basically we are exchanging maybe a truck or another truck. It doesn't have to be truck for a truck. It could be two cars for a van or some other asset land for a building. So one asset versus another. And those assets are non-monetary in nature. So there are special rules that we need to learn about when it comes to these assets. The first rule we need to know is this. Ordinarily, accounted for on the basis of what? So when we account for these transactions, well, what we're going to be looking at first is the fair value of the asset that we are given up. So the fair value of the asset given up. So this is the first thing we do. What does that mean? It means if we know how much we are given up, we record the new asset because you're exchanging an old one for a new one. Record the new asset at the fair value of the asset given up. How much assets did you gave up? That's how you would record the asset. You don't know this information. If this information is unknown, so you don't know the fair value of the asset given up. If that's not known, we go to number two. Then we use the fair value, hopefully, of the asset received. Hopefully, we know this. Hopefully, we know the fair value of the asset received. If that's the case, you would record the new asset based on the fair value of the asset received. So first, then second. Most of the time, you're going to know what's the fair value of the asset you're given up most of the time. Especially if it involves a little bit of cash and some asset, you know what's the fair value of that asset. So that's how much this is the general rule. What else do we need to know? We need to know that companies should recognize, it means record. Recognize means record. Immediately, any gain or losses. So we're going to have gains and losses when we do exchanges. When the transaction has a commercial substance. So this is an important term we need to learn about because what is commercial substance? So what we're saying is if the transaction has a commercial substance, recognize both gains and losses. Now we need to define commercial substance. So let's go to the textbook and let's look at what commercial substance. An exchange has a commercial substance if the future cash flow as a result of the transaction changes. So if there is a change in the cash flow as a result of this transaction, if there's a change in the cash flow, then guess what? We assume that this transaction has a commercial substance. What does that mean? If the cash flow changes? That means the two parties of the transaction, both parties of the transaction, economic position, both of the economic position changed as the result of the transaction because the assumption here is this. When you go into, when you are undertaken an economic transaction, the reason you are undertaken this economic transaction because it's going to improve your position. So no one will go, will undertake a transaction. If their economic position, it's not going not only change, but improve. So the assumption here if it has economic transaction. So let's take a look at an example a little bit further to explain this. So let's assume Andrew company exchanged some of its equipment for land held by Rodik Inc. It's likely that the timing and the amount of the cash flow rising from the land will differ significantly from that of the equipment. So here what's happening is we are exchanging land. We are exchanging land, land for equipment. Okay. And what we are saying because of this transaction, the cash flow will change. Well, if the cash flow is going to change the timing of the cash flow or the amount of the cash flow or the risk. So either the timing amount or risk. So are we receiving it sooner than before later than before? Do we have more risk because of this transaction is the amount that we're going to be receiving more or less any change in those? It means the transaction has an economic commercial substance. Okay. So we're saying as a result, both Andrew and Rodik are in different economic position. Therefore, this is a commercial substance transaction. Now bear in mind here we are exchanging land for equipment. It doesn't have to be land for equipment or equipment for land. What if the company exchanged similar assets such as truck for another truck? Does that disqualify from commercial substance? Not necessary. Even if the exchange of similar asset, a change in economic position of the company can result. What does that mean? Let's assume the useful life of the truck received is significantly longer than the truck given up. Well, the timing has changed. We're going to be receiving more cash because the life of the truck is longer. So the cash flow for the trucks can differ significantly. Well, once they differ, what do we have? We have commercial substance. So the transaction has a commercial substance. Now, however, it is possible that the exchange of similar asset does not have difference in the cash flow. So we may exchange similar asset, but what does not have significant difference in cash flow? Well, the company in the same economic position as before. So both companies are in the same economic position. In this situation, we say that the transaction lacks commercial substance. So here, this is the definition of lacks commercial substance. It doesn't have commercial substance. What does that mean? Well, it means you still recognize the losses, but you have to defer the gain. And we'll talk about the rules later on. But this is what it means to know if the transaction has commercial substance or lacks commercial substance. Because once I use this term in the future, I'm going to assume that you know what does it mean. So meaning of commercial substance, exchange has commercial substance if the future cash flow changes as a result of the transaction. If the two parties position changes, the economic has commercial substance. Now, what does that mean for us? Here are the rules. If the transaction, if the exchange has commercial substance, then yes, we recognize gains and losses immediately. That's what it means. So it's easy. We book both the gain and the losses. If the exchange, so this is one, could be scenario one, scenario two. If the exchange lacks commercial substance and no cash is received. Now here we could have cash. Here we could have cash. Okay. It doesn't really matter. Here we could have cash, some cash. But here if the exchange lacks commercial substance and no cash is received and there is no cash. What do we have to do? We have to, for the gain, we have to defer the gain. We have to defer the gain. And we'll see what does it mean, defer the gain. It means you will take the gain later. You're going to add it to the cost. But you recognize the loss immediately. So if it has commercial substance or does not have commercial substance, you recognize the loss. It makes the difference with the gain and when there is no cash. What, what if we have, what we have lack of commercial substance, now cash received? Well now, although they lack commercial substance, but the two parties are serious. How do we know that they're serious? This is not shuffling papers just to recognize gains and losses for book purposes because they exchange cash. How much cash do they have to exchange? If the cash is 25% or more of the fair value of the exchange. So we have to have a 25, there is a limit. The cash has to be 25% or more. Recognize the entire gain because earning process is complete. So of the, if they're exchanging 25% or more cash of the fair value of the exchange, what we're saying here then this is, this is a real transaction. If it's less, then we're going to recognize partial gain. And guess what, with losses, we always recognize the losses. If it has commercial substance, does not have commercial substance, cash received, no cash received, always recognize the losses. The gains only when there's a commercial substance and if it lacks commercial substance, but the cash is 25% or more of the value of the exchange. Otherwise we defer the cash, we defer the gain if it lacks commercial substance. If it lacks commercial substance, but we received some cash less than 25, we're going to recognize partial gain. So make sure you know those rules. We're going to work examples, but you have to kind of basically memorize them before the test. So again, exchange loss situation. If it's loss, you recognize the loss immediately, whether the exchange lacks commercial substance or not. What's the rationale behind this? One of the concepts behind this is conservatism, because if you have a loss, recognize the loss immediately. So basically understate, don't overstate your asset or your gains. Companies should not value asset at more than their cash equivalent price, because if we have a loss, if we defer the loss, it means the cost of our asset is going up. So if we don't recognize the loss, what do we have to do? If we're going to defer the loss, if we are, which we don't, if we are going to defer the loss, the loss gets added to the cost of the asset, because if we defer it, we're going to tap it on the asset, and you're going to see how, and it's going to increase the cost of the asset. Well, we cannot overstate assets, and that's the thing, that's the rule of conservatism. You cannot overstate asset. But what happened, let me just put this note here. If we defer the gain, if we defer the gain, what's going to happen, you will see later on, the cost of the asset will go down. The gain will reduce the cost of the asset. That's why we can defer the gain, but we cannot defer the cost, because it's going to increase the cost of the asset. So this is deferring gain, this is gain not losses, this part right here. So please don't mix the two. So let's take a look at this example, and let's take a look at these rules. This example to learn some of the rules. Information processing, trades, it's used machine for a new model at Jared business solution. Okay, so we have an exchange. Does it have a commercial substance? Yes, the exchange has a commercial substance. Now, few things I did not clarify, maybe I need to clarify before we work this example. One of the rules is this. How do we, how do we determine if we have a gain or a loss? Because I did not, I assume that you know the rules, but that's not, that's not assume anything. What we do is we look at the fair value, fair value of asset given up versus the book value. So the fair value asset given up. So we look at the fair value of the asset given up versus the book value. And let's see how do we determine this. If the fair value of the asset given up, if the fair value is a greater, fair value is greater than the book value. So this is FV and this is BV. If the fair value is greater, then we're going to recognize a gain. Okay, the fair value is greater. If the fair value is lower than the book value, we're going to recognize a loss. Oops, loss. We're going to recognize a loss. Now, I did not define what book value is. What is book value? The book value is the cost of asset minus its accumulated depreciation. So the book value equal the cost of the asset minus accumulated depreciation. So if the book value is not given, you need to know how to come up with the book value. Okay, because sometimes it's not given. So they will tell you the cost is that much accumulated. They will tell you the cost is 100,000. Accumulated depreciation is 40,000. Oops, that's, I don't think I can go back there. Let me just, so if they told you cost is, let's assume they said cost is 100,000 and accumulated depreciation is 40,000. Well, guess what? 100,000 minus 40,000 is the book value because sometimes they may not give you the book value of the asset. Now, they're telling you the fair value of the asset, the fair value of the asset equal to 80,000. Well, if the fair value is 80,000, the fair value is greater than the book value. So the fair value is 80,000 and you should be given the fair value, the greater than the book value, then you would record a gain. And hopefully, you know that gain will be recorded by a credit, not a debit. If the fair value of this asset is 50,000, now here the fair value is 50, which is less than 60, less than the book value. Then you have a loss and hopefully, you know, we record a loss by a debit. We record a loss by a debit. This is the loss. This is a gain of 20,000 and this is a loss of 10,000. You cannot have a gain and a loss at the same time. Those are two different scenarios. But because I assume that you know how to calculate the gain or a loss, maybe I should not assume this. This is how we calculate the gain or the loss. Back to this example, the used machine has a book value of 8,000. So here the book value is given. Well, they're also given us that the cost is 12 and the accumulated depreciation is 4. So they're giving us everything. They're giving us the book value, the original cost, and accumulated depreciation. Here the fair value of the asset is 6,000. Well, hold on a second. Book value is 8, but fair value is 6. So the book value is less, I'm sorry, is greater than the fair value. Or fair value, if you look at it from the other way, fair value is less than the book value. What do we have? We have a loss of how much? What's the loss? The loss is 2,000 because the fair value is less. Okay. The new model lists for 16,000. So we want to exchange this new model. It's list for 16,000. Well, that's irrelevant to us because until we finish the transaction, see how much we really paid for this. Jared, the seller, gives the party that's trading the new asset, gives information processing, gives us, we have the old asset, a trade allowance for 9. It doesn't matter if they give us trade allowance for 9. Don't think because they give us a trade allowance for 9, we have a gain. Okay. Some students think, well, I have a trade allowance of 9. It doesn't matter what they did. They must have inflated their list price because they inflated their list price. They can give you a higher fair value, but you know what your fair value is. You don't let them decide what your fair value. Okay. So don't let that confuses you. Okay. So how do we record the cost of the asset? We already figure out the loss is 2,000. How do we record the cost? Well, the cost of the new asset. What is the general rule? The general rule is you record the cost at the fair value of the asset you gave up. What did you gave up? Well, think about it. You gave up the old asset, which is equal to 6,000. As far as you're concerned, equal to 6,000. Okay.  How much cash did you have to pay? Okay. So the list price is 16. So we want to find out how much cash did you have to pay? They said, well, we're going to give you a trade for 9. So what you're left with is the list price is 16. They gave you a trade-in allowance for 9. So they told you to pay 7,000.  So what you gave up is 13,000. So you gave up the old asset, plus you gave up cash of 7,000. So the cost of the new machine is 13,000. Here they're not telling you how much cash you paid, but we're able to back into it. Well, if they gave you, if they said it's 16, they're telling you the old asset, it's going to be considered 9, what you left with is 7. But you don't care about the 9, because once again, they could have inflated this trade because they inflated this price here. So the true cost of this asset, as far as we're concerned, when we debit this asset, we debit it at 13,000. And when we calculate the loss, I just did the loss for you, the loss is 2,000. So what is the entry? What is the entry? Well, we're going to book the asset as 13,000. Why is it 13,000 once again? The 6,000 fair value old asset, plus $7,000 cash. Those two together equal to the 13,000. What else do we have to do if we are getting root of the old asset? We have to credit the old asset and debit accumulated depreciation. So we have to credit the old asset. We have to credit the old asset because if you're getting root of the old asset, you have to credit the old asset. You can no longer keep it on your books. And the asset has a cost of 12 and accumulated depreciation of 4. That entry you cannot run away from. If you're giving up the asset, you have to get root of it. And don't forget to get root of its accumulated depreciation because those two accounts go hand in hand. If you are getting root of an asset, you have to get root of its accumulated depreciation. Now we already recognize the loss. The loss is a debit of 2,000. We have to record the loss. The loss has a debit of 2,000. And what else does this balance? It doesn't because we also paid cash. So we credit cash of 7,000. And because this transact, well, it doesn't matter. This is a loss. You always recognize the loss. It doesn't matter if it lacks commercial substance or does not lack commercial substance. So this transaction, if they told you it lacks commercial substance, the entry would be the same. Why? Because we had a loss. And for a loss, you will always recognize the loss if it has commercial substance or if it doesn't have commercial substance. Good. All right. Exchange gain situation and has commercial substance. Once again, once you see exchange and commercial substance, usually record the cost of non-monetary asset in exchange for the fair value of the asset given up. That's the general rule. And immediately recognize the gain. So once again, if it has commercial substance and you have a gain, you recognize the gain. Let's look at this example. Interstate transportation exchange a number of use truck plus cash for a semi truck. So they exchange some used truck, few of them, plus some cash for a semi truck. The use truck has a combined book value of 42. So they're telling us the book value, which is a cost of 64 less 22 of accumulated depreciation. Now we need to know their fair value. Interstate purchasing agent experience in the second hand market indicates that the used trucks has a fair value of 49. Well, we have everything that we need. In addition to the trucks interstate must pay $11,000 in cash for the semi truck. So what is the cost of this new semi truck? What is the cost is what we gave up? What we gave up is two things. We gave up the old trucks. We paid $11,000 in cash and we gave up trucks that are worth $49,000. So the cost is those two combined, which is 60,000. So in the entry you debit the new semi truck at 60,000. So how much do you record it at? The fair value of the asset given up. We're giving up fair value of the trucks plus the cash. Now we need to know if it's a gain or a loss. How do we determine if we're going to recognize a gain or a loss? But before we do this, let's start to put this entry together. So let's try to put this entry together. So the truck is going to be recorded at 60,000. So the new asset, I'm just going to call it the new asset, which is the semi truck. The new asset will be recorded at, what did we say, 60,000? 60,000. So this is the debit and this is the credit column. Oops, credit. So we're going to debit the asset 60,000. Now what else do we have to do? Once we got rid of the old trucks, we have to credit the cost of the old truck, 60,000, and it's accumulated depreciation. We have to credit the old truck and accumulated depreciation of 22. So we're going to credit the old assets, there are a bunch of assets, for how much, for 64 and 22 depreciation. We're going to credit this for 64 to get rid of the old truck and debit. Well, the debit should come first, but that's okay. Debit accumulated depreciation of not 22, 42. Not 42, 22. So this entry, those two, to remove old truck. That's good. Also I believe we paid cash, so we're going to credit cash of 11,000. What's left in this transaction is to determine if we have a gain or a loss. For one thing, this does not balance. So 60,000 plus 22 does not equal to 64 plus 11, so it does not balance. I'm either missing a gain or a loss. How do I determine if I have a gain or a loss? What is the rule? The rule is you compare the fair value of the asset given up to the book value. The fair value is 49,000 and the book value was given. The book value is 42, which is given to us. The fair value is greater than 42, therefore we have a gain of 7,000. And always a gain is a credit. So when we record the gain, we record it by a credit. We record the gain of 7,000. Now if you want to double check your math, make sure you add everything up. 60 plus 22, this is 82,000. Hopefully this will add up. 7 plus 64 is 71 plus 11 is 82. So total debits equal total credits, everything matches. So this is how we record this transaction. And again, this transaction has a commercial substance, then we can recognize the gain. And this is the entry right here. This is what I just did. And this is how we came up with the gain. Now, what happened if we have a gain? Transaction lacks commercial substance and no cash is received. Under those circumstances, we defer the third gain. Basically push the gain into the future by how? By lowering the cost of the new asset. So if we have a gain, we cannot recognize the gain. So the gain of 7,000 that we recognize earlier that we just did. Let me go back to the previous slide. So you see that gain right here? We're going to be assuming that this transaction, we're going to assume it lacks commercial substance. If it lacks commercial substance, we cannot recognize the gain. So what's going to happen to the gain? We defer the gain and reduce the cost of the new truck. Okay, so this is how we defer the gain. Why? What does it mean we're reducing? So the cost of the truck instead of 60, it's going to be minus 7. It's going to be 53. So this will be gone. And the cost will be 53. So we'll debit the truck for 53, debit the cumulative depreciation, credit the truck, credit the cash. What do we mean by deferring the gain? Down the road, when we get rid of this truck, the new truck, the cost is lower. So the gain will recapture the gain. This is what we mean by deferring the gain. It means we lower the cost now down the road when we trade or sell this truck because the cost is lower, the gain will be higher and the gain will be recaptured. So we defer the gain. Okay? So here we can do it in two ways. We can say, well, the fair value of the truck, the semi-truck is 60,000. This is what we calculated earlier, minus the gain. Or another way to calculate this, another way, this is called the book value method. We'll look at the book value. We use the book value. In other words, we use the book value rather than the fair value plus the cash paid. Plus the cash paid gives us 53,000. So those are two methods. This is called the book value method. Book value method. So if it lacks commercial substance, you could use this method or you could stick with this method and basically calculate the gain, then reduce the gain. It's up to you how you would like to do it. But basically, this is the entry. If the transaction lacks commercial substance, and remember, no cash is received. We did not receive any cash. So it's 100% lacking of commercial substance. Now, this scenario, we're going to have a gain situation. It lacks commercial substance, but some cash is received. When a company received some cash, it's referred to as a boot. It may immediately recognize a portion of the gain. So we're going to have to find out. The general formula for the gain recognition, when an exchange includes some of the cash, is as follows. So how do we figure out how much gain to recognize? We're going to take the cash received, which is called the boot, the cash received, divided by the cash received, plus the fair value of the other asset received, multiplied by the gain. So we want to know what portion of the transaction is cash. What portion of the transaction is cash? So let's take a look at an example, because that's the best way to learn this. So we have this corporation traded in a used machinery with a book value of 60,000. So the book value is 60. Cost is 110. Less circular depreciation, 110 minus 50 is 60,000. And a fair value of 100,000. Well, the fair value is greater than the book value. We have a $40,000 of gain. Here we go. 100 minus 40. It receives an exchange in machine with a fair value of 90,000 plus we received cash. Now we received boot. Okay? It lacks commercial substance, but we received cash. What does that mean? It means we have to do a quick calculation to find out how much of this gain we are going to recognize and whatever we don't recognize, what do we do with it? If it's not recognizable, we defer. We defer. So we're going to use the formula that I just showed you earlier right here. So copy the formula down if you're going to attempt this. Stop the recording. Copy the formula and see if we could see if you could calculate how much gain to recognize. Let's work with this. So 10,000 is the cash received divided by cash received plus fair value. Okay? So basically what we are saying here is 10,000 divided by 100,000, which is 10%, which is this whole thing equal to 10%. So we're going to recognize 10% of the gain. 10% of the gain. The gain is 40,000. So 10,000 gain recorded, guess when? Now we're going to recognize 10,000 now. So if we recognize 10,000 now, how much left? 36. Would that gain evaporate? No. It's going to be defer. How do we defer again? By reducing the cost of the new truck. So the basis of the new machine is the fair value of the new machine minus the deferred gain, minus the deferred gain, which is the basis is 54,000. Another way to look at it is the book value of the old machine. Portion of the book value presumably sold only 6,000. Basically we presumably sold 10% of the 60,000 of the old machine. So basically we're saying is we sold the old machine and for cash 10% of it was cash. That's another way to look at it. Okay? So cash, we debit cash 10,000. We debit the new machine 54,000 as calculated above. Accumulated depreciation is for the old machine is 50 credit the old machine. And we have a gain on the disposal of the machine is 4,000. So the gain is recognized immediately. And here we have the $36,000 of the gain that we are deferring for the future. Let's go back to this example. Okay. So make sure you make sure you review this example so you understand so you understand it. Just in case you're wondering why the fair value is 100 is 90,000. The fair value was 100,000, but we received 10,000 cash back. So it is equal to 90,000. Just in case you are wondering how we come up with the 90,000 here. Okay. And here is a summary of the rules. Remember if it's a loss, we always recognize loss. Okay. Compute total gain or loss on the transaction. This amount equal to the difference between the fair value of the asset given up and the book value of the asset given up. Remember you are dealing with the assets that are given up to determine the gain or the loss. That's step one. If a loss is computed in step one, always recognize the loss. If a gain is computed and the exchange has a commercial substance, recognize the gain. Easy. If a gain is computed and the exchange lacks a commercial substance and no cash is received, no gain. You cannot recognize the gain. If some cash is received, if some cash is given, remember if given, it doesn't matter. It's about to receive. If some cash is given, no gain is recognized. If some cash is received, the following portion of the gain is recognized. So basically you have to figure out how much of the gain we need to recognize. If the amount of the cash exceeds, now remember, if the amount of the cash exceeds 25% or more, both parties recognize the entire gain or the entire loss. If there is a 25% amount of cash involved, what we are assuming here is the, it's a true transaction if they are exchanging cash. Therefore, we assume it has a commercial substance. Okay. Well, we could look at this example. Sent a company exchange equipment used in its manufacturing operation, plus $2,000 in cash for similar equipment. We are paying cash for similar equipment used in operation of Delaware Company. The following information pertain to the exchange. So sent a company exchange and equipment that it used in operation that has a cost of $28,000, accumulated depreciation of $19,000. So $28,000 minus $19,000 will give you the book value. The fair value is $13,000 and cash given up, they gave up, they paid $2,000. Remember, let's go back up here. If cash is given and there's a gain, it doesn't matter. What matters is if the cash is received. So for this party, cash is given up. So the first thing is what's $28,000 minus $19,000, $28,000 minus $19,000. That's $18,000, $18,000 minus $9,000 is $9,000 equal to $19,000. So the book value equal to $19,000 and the fair value equal to $13,000. Guess what? We have a loss for Santa. Delaware. The equipment has a cost of $28,000, accumulated depreciation of $10,000. So the book value for this is $18,000 and the fair value is $15,500. Also, Delaware will have a loss from the loss perspective. So let's record this transaction. For Santa, the fair value of the equipment received is $15,500. Minus the cash paid, they paid $2,000 cash. That's going to be reducing what we received, obviously, which gives them the asset of $13,500. Why? Because they had to pay cash because if the cash is going out, it's reducing the fair value of what we are receiving. Less the book value of the asset. So the book value of the asset is $28,000, $28,000 minus $19,000, obviously is $9,000, not $19,000, what I calculated earlier. So this is not $19,000, this is $0,000, this is $9,000. The book value is $9,000. I did the math error. The book value is $9,000. So the loss on the exchange is $4,000. I'm sorry, the gain here because I made a mistake about the book value. The book value is less than the fair value. So we have a gain of $4,500. We have a gain. Delaware, the fair value of the equipment is $13,000. They received cash of $2,000. So basically it's $15,500. That's how much they... That's the total fair value, total fair value because $13,500 plus $2,000 is the total. The fair value, the book value of the asset given up is $18,000. So if we compare $15,500 to $18,000, they have a loss, Delaware have a loss of $2,500. So let's go ahead and record the transaction. Santa would record the equipment at $15,500. Fair value of the equipment, $15,500. They removed the old equipment. They credit cash. They credit the old equipment to remove the old equipment and they credit again for $4,500. Delaware, they received cash of $2,000. They received a new equipment for $13,500. That's the fair value of the new equipment. They debit accumulated depreciation, $10,000. And they record the loss of $10,000 and they credit the old equipment for $28,000. So this is if it has commercial substance. Assuming here it has commercial substance. So if it has commercial substance, notice here, the gain is recorded. If it lacks commercial substance, this amount here will be removed from here and reduce the equipment. So if it lacks commercial substance, the cost of the equipment goes down. This is for Santa. For Delaware, if it has commercial substance, we're going to be recording the loss. If it lacks commercial substance, no difference. We're going to be recording the loss. And this is, don't forget, the loss is recorded regardless if we have commercial substance or if we lack commercial substance. You could read this business article from the Wall Street Journal just to expand your horizon. We may discuss it in class, but if you're online, you could just read it. Accounting for contributions. What happened if somebody contributed an asset to our business? Basically contribution. I'm just going to give you the rules. Companies should use the fair value of the asset. So what we do is because we really have no, if somebody given us an asset, there's no cost. Really, I mean, there's no cost. So how do we record it if there's no cost to us? Well, we record it at fair value and should recognize contribution received as revenue in the period received. So we're going to debit the asset at fair value. That's the debit. Let's assume, I don't know, make it 30,000. And we're going to credit some type of revenue for 30,000. Some say you should credit capital. Well, owners, you know, if the owners are getting something in return, it's capital contribution. But here nobody is getting anything in return. If they are just contributing, accounting for contribution, accounting for contribution. So let's take a look at this example. Max Meat Packing Inc. has recently accepted the nation of land with a fair value of 150 from the Memphis Industrial Development Core. So basically what they want them to do most probably to open a meat packing plan in Memphis and the Memphis Industrial Development. Okay. In return, well, it says promise to build a packing plant in Memphis. So what is the entry? We debit the asset, the land at fair value. We credit contribution revenue, some type of a revenue account called contribution revenue. When a company contribute a non-monetary asset, now the company contributing rather than receiving, it should record the amount of the donation as an expense at the fair value of the donated asset. Now, if we record it at fair value, if we have an old asset, if we have an asset, and an asset has a value of just for $30,000. Okay. And we're donating this asset. Okay. If we have to donate this asset at fair value, let's assume the fair value equal to 40. Well, guess what? If we're going to get rid of this asset, we still have to account for the difference. So we have to record again. Okay. Because we have to record the expense. Remember, here the expense will be, we have to record it at fair value, 40,000. The asset will be removed at 30,000, assuming no accumulated depreciation. So we have a 10,000 difference, then we have a gain. We have to record again. Okay. So if we record the expense at the fair value, because the expense being recorded at fair value, the expense right here, expense is debited at fair value, then we have to record any gain or loss. And let's look at this example. Client Industries donated a land to the city of LA for a city park. The land has a cost of 80,000 and a fair value of 110. Now think about it. You're going to be debiting an expense. I'm just going to write this here, then we will show you the answer. If you're going to be debiting an expense at fair value, the expense is 110. The land will need to be credited 80,000 because we are removing the land. So we are missing 30,000 in the entry. Well, guess what? We have to recognize the gain. We have to recognize the gain. So let me just delete this. Erase this so you can see the entry. Erase everything on the slide. Contribution expense, land and gain on the disposal of land. Notice, we have to record. If we incur the loss, we would also record the loss. At the end of this recording, I'm going to remind you to check out my website for hotlactures.com, like my recording, and remember what I told you at the beginning. You are investing in yourself. You are investing in your CPA certification. You know, my subscription is nominal. You're going to be studying for the CPA exam once in your lifetime. And this certification will serve you between 30 to 40 years. It's going to pay dividend for you. Put that certification behind you. Focus on your career. I'm here to help you. The monetary value for my subscription is really meaningless and in the grand scheme of things. Anyhow, as I told you before, check out my website to see how well is your university performing. I do have scores by section as well as overall score. Most importantly, good luck, study hard and stay safe.


You guys just decided from x trades back with another weekly analysis video start off with the indices as usual Take a look at SPY first so really nice bounce off that 427 level this week and No, we got a pretty nice rally, but really weak close. So let's take a look at the daily chart again So yeah, we had a really nice rally and we were flagging here nicely But on Friday we did give back a good amount of gains So not the best action, but not bad either. So if we take out that this mini trend line here There's a very good chance that we could Continue to see the next leg up. So yeah, we'll see what happens next week, but overall not bad action Let's take a look at QQQ Go to the weekly chart first So QQQ is building out this bigger Bull flag here so that this is good action and it tried to break out The 370 level and it tried to break out of the bigger bull flag, but it failed here. So that's not great But let's take a look at the daily chart Definitely a bigger pullback here, right? Not as orderly So there is a mini bull flag forming here Move these So there is still a mini bull flag forming here and if it can take that out that would be bullish But right now it looks more like we're back in this chop range But if we take out the 370 then I would definitely be bullish on the market But yeah, that's pretty much what I got for the indices and now let's take a look at some big cap tech stocks Start off with NVIDIA NVIDIA rejected 470 and we had a really nice rally and then it rejected 470. So that's Yeah, Friday was really ugly pretty nasty pullback to collect the weekly chart weekly chart looks fine Looks like we're just consolidating between this 430 to 470 range. So No big deal. It looks like It could just go sideways for a bit longer Or if we take that 470 level out, then you definitely want to be bullish on this stuff But yeah, that's NVIDIA next up Amazon Let's take a look at Amazon's weekly. So Amazon weekly trying to reclaim this uptrend level I tried to reclaim it but ended up closing below. So that's not a good sign. Let's take a look at the daily chart Let me let me remove all my lines on Amazon So Amazon definitely has a key support level over there Definitely resistance around there and there's definitely another level over here. So 131 is where it tried to hold and then it ended up closing below that on Friday, right? So there's a gap up here So if it can reclaim 131 then then then we have room up to 135 and if we can Take out 135 then we got room to 142. But yeah, these are the key levels on Amazon next up Apple We would move everything as well for Apple Try new lines because it's been a while. So Apple definitely has some timeline resistance here Let's take a look at some price levels definitely has some support over there and another level around this area Let's see what else does Apple have and really not that many levels Ask that. Let's say there's one level here And then another level at the top Yeah, these are the key levels for Apple. So Apple tried to break out at that trend line Touched it and then rejected but if it can consolidate and hold above that 180 level this would be bullish action and Yeah, I would be bullish on Apple as long as they can hold that 180 level. Yeah, that's what I got for Apple next up Tesla So Tesla is forming this really nice bull flag here Formed a nice bull flag and then broke out but failed And now it's just back in consolidation. This has earnings next week. So definitely don't be trying to trade this But yeah, we'll see what happens Really nice weekly bull flag here. So it was you what happens with Tesla Next up Microsoft Microsoft has a nice Bull flag forming on the weekly chart. Let's go to the daily chart Tried to break out of the bull flag and it actually did close above the bull flag So that's a big positive for sure. So Microsoft is holding up pretty well, actually If it can take out that 333 level then very good chance that we could see a move back up to 344 So yeah, Microsoft's holding up pretty well here Next up Meadow Meadow had made new 52 week highs last week. So very impressive action Yeah, new 52 week highs here and they pulled back in pretty hard on Friday, but Overall still still good action. So let me redraw my levels Definitely key resistance over there and there was some resistance over here and I finally broke out I was pulling back in again But yeah, these are the key levels for Meadow So key support is 307 and key resistance is 326 and it could just chopper on here for quite some time So we'll see what happens and there's also trend line forming New trend line forming around here. So Yeah, overall Meadow is acting really well and it's yeah, I think it's the only big cap Text up to make new 52 week highs last week. So definitely very bullish on Meadow No way Google actually also made me 52 week highs, but yeah, let's take a look at Google So Google has key resistance level over there. Google is actually acting a lot better recently Key support level over here key resistance over here and it's trying to hold that 139 level So if it can't hold that would be very bullish and if we can hold that 139 level then next support would be that 145 ish and then all time highs back at 150 so Google is holding up really well here And it's actually still holding up. It's It's made it's still holding its uptrend. So really good action here in Google Yeah, next up we'll take a look at AMD AMD has been forming this really long bull flag here and It's trying to break out Let's take a look at the daily chart So yeah, I tried to break out but it failed So this was a little flag that was forming And it got rejected pretty hard on Friday, but still holding up relatively well If it can take out that this mini bull flag, then I would definitely be bullish on AMD But overall it's acting pretty well Netflix so this one's acting really really Bad it's been yeah, it's been really weak recently So this is the one that if you're looking to short a big cap tech stock, this would be the one It's acting really weak, right? But yeah, Netflix has room. Let's see see where the next level of support is for Netflix So definitely keep resistance over there. There's some support over here I would say support level 319 and then another support level would be around that 345 ish So yeah, Netflix has room down to 345 and if it forms a bear flag, then this would be a good opportunity to short down to 345 Yeah, that's it for Netflix And now let's take a look at ARKK, let me remove this alert So ARKK is looking pretty pretty bearish here It has that 37.6 support level if that gets taken out then it could go a lot a lot lower And they rejected that 40 level earlier this week. So that's not good at all Let's take a look at the weekly chart. Yeah, if it fails to hold that 37.66 level has room all the way down to 35.75 ish But yeah, ARKK still looks really really weak here And yeah, it's having a lot of trouble holding scram But yeah, that's pretty much it for the big cap tech stocks and growth names. So growth names out still here looking pretty bearish here. So Yeah, now, let's take a look at some of the best the stocks that have been holding up and the best opportunities for next week Um, so to start off. Well, let's do crad strike This is a name that I talked about last week as well but this name has been acting incredibly well really strong breakout last week and Really nice follow through and now it's forming a really nice flag here Look at that volume up volume and on the down volume very light volume. So this is very very good action um So ideally you want to see crud strike consolidate for a couple more days and then form a bull flag and then this could be a top watch but yeah Palantir very similar Really nice breakout and now it's starting to form a flag here And if it breaks that flag, it could be a viable setup But um, yeah, Palantir, um It's looking really good here And ideally it breaks that trend line Next up acmr. So this is a semi conductor name This one has been acting really well all year long Really nice rally starting from like made til now And yeah, this one's been acting really well clear resistance at that Eyes the 19.7 level and that $20 psychological level. So definitely a lot of resistance there But the reason I really like this chart is because it has a lot of nice accumulation volume So look at those big skyscraper volume, right? That's that's a very bullish sign um And yeah, it's been holding up really well recently and I think it has a chance to make a big move But yeah, that's acmr and next up nvo speaking of big volume. This one has skyscraper volume This is a sign that institutions are loading up into this dog This dog's definitely one that you want to pay attention to this one does trade really funky It gaps up and gaps down But uh, yeah, really really nice volume here This is a clear sign that institutions are buying this dog And the weekly looks great. It broke. It's making new 52 week highs and it's been trending for quite some time now and stocks that tend to trend continue to trend. So This is the stock that was definitely one that you want to keep your eyes on Next up lly. This is another stock that had an incredible run this year And uh, now it's starting to uh, emit a really nice snapback rally from this pullback Really strong rally and now it got to menu to highs and now it's starting to pull back here and get extended So you want to see some sort of consolidation And uh, yeah, that 600 level could be a good buy the dip area Um, and also really nice volume on that push up and last but not least k and f So this is a new ipo stock Um, we made a really strong run and then formed the flag here a really long flag Uh Yeah, really long flag here And then it broke out and now it's been consolidating for quite some time And now it's forming a really nice uh flag set up here. So right under that 53 second, uh resistance level It's forming a really nice flag here. So this one looks like a top watch as well. Yeah, that's all I got for this week Thank you guys for tuning in There's a reason why x trades is currently the fastest growing application on the market for sharing financial ideas With over 2.5 million dollars paid in the last two years to contributors Users are flocking to see what trades the top traders on the leaderboard are sharing in real time If you're looking to grow your reputation as a trader on the internet or discuss your trading ideas with other reputable investors Click the link below and get connected with the trading mentor today completely free of charge


Hi everyone, Sean with jaspyscasebreaks.com here doing 2020 Bowman Draft Sapphire five box break pick your team number 10 Where we're giving away the Tigers as long as you had two or more teams So how to be entered with the Tigers by two or more teams in this break get entered to win No max entries by two teams one entry four teams two entries six teams three entries, etc If you buy one team, you will not be entered 32 cards per box all card ship all cards are penny-sleeved with the 4 cent Looking for these colored parallels So didn't even copy and paste the list in already Okay, so to figure out how who's gonna get the spot for the Tigers we're going to Copy the customer lists over into a new sheet and alphabetized so Charles Samuelson with two spots gets one entry David Sitko gets one Eric Ainge gets one John Alps gets one John Daneen gets one Josh Melton gets one Joshua Cunin gets one Mark Bissette Gonna get three Matt Arnold with two Ryan Lind With one and there you go So we've got 13 entries We're gonna copy that over here and name on top after four to one five times on the randomizer gets the Tigers fifth and final time Congratulations Eric Ainge You got yourself the Tigers Right there five times on the randomizer five times on the dice. Cool. So let's print this out and rip So here's our five boxes. So 32 cards per box two colored parallels no autos Last spot mojo on this Get who got it. I want to say John Samuelson Maybe whoever it was The break notes and last about mojo will go to you That's oh was Yankees. Oh, okay, Walter. So Walter got it. See look at John being a honest guy just So looks like we got a Yellow and an aqua. I think aqua is 99 this year, right aqua is 20. Okay Okay Okay, I'll take that That's the lowest one we've had so far Cory Lee for the Astros Mark Vientos for the Mets Alika Williams for the Rays Dane Acker for the A's Carmen Ladzinski for the Pirates That's true Honesty penultimate mojo for John Carson Ragsdale for the Phillies Nick Bitzko for the Rays RJ Dabovich for the Giants Garrett crochet for the White Sox that throws really hard Xavier Edwards for the Rays Ace of Lacy number three overall pick Fourth overall pick Max Meyer was number three for the Kansas City Royals That's going to mark Bissette Aaron Shortridge for the Pirates Clayton Beater for the Dodgers and Ronaldo Hernandez for the Rays I always I keep forgetting so Max Meyer was number three. Ace of Lacy was number four Brett Batty for the Mets Addison coffee for the White Sox out Thomas for the Diamondbacks PD Halpin from the Indians Robert Pawson for the A's going to Eric Ainge Shane drawing for the Red Sox mark Bissette Owen Keis for the Padres no longer a Padre now an Indian But this will be going to the Padres and Alex Falasacos Freddie Zamora for the Brewers Xavier Warren for the Brewers Bobby Whit Jr. for the Royals going to mark Bissette Trevor Halver for the Yankees Ethan Hankins for the Indians Reese Hines for the Reds Logan Gilbert for the Mariners Isaiah Green for the Mets Riley Green for the Tigers and our yellow is Tristan Casas to 99 for the Red Sox and Mark Bissette and Louise Gill Aqua 10 out of 20 for the Yankees and Walter Lutz last Bob Lodger Not bad, huh Sam? Pretty pretty cool It's funny is as I was doing the break last night Sam one of my buddies who was watching Sent me a link to my phone that same card, but numbered two out of five is currently up for auction and As of last night it was like seven thousand dollars or something like that With like two days left. So I had assumed that it would double in price and probably go like 14 or 15 grand So We'll see just funny though card out of five You have one of them in your hand and the other ones up for auction right then So nice first box a couple good names in there yellow and more aqua There you go Let's keep the aqua going And we got one that's backwards. Is there photo variations in this? Everybody know Interesting CJ Abrams Padres Jordan and wogu for the Cubs Hunter Bishop for the Giants Austin Hendrick for the Reds Osvaldo Prazza for the Yankees Pete Crow Armstrong for the Mets Charles John Samuelsen Bryson stop for the Phillies Jackson Miller for the Reds Ronaldo Hernandez for the Rays and for some reason this one is flipped around Like I said, I don't know if there's I don't think this Yeah, this is not a photo variation Luke little sorry, you don't have photo variation in this Luke little for the Cubs Hunter Barnhart for the Rays Joey Cantillo for the Indians Cody hosts for the Dodgers Josh Young for the Rangers Samion Fonse for the Nationals and Kyle This fell for the Rhino Royals. I know regular draft had like photo variations and stuff like that for like Dominguez aclac Poison wit Jr. I think but Pretty sure Luke little is not in that checklist Brady Mcconnell for the Royals Jared Jones for the Pirates Bailey Horn for the White Sox Burl Careway for the Cubs Logan Hoffman for the Pirates Slade Sikoni for the Diamondbacks Jaron Duran for the Red Sox Daniel Cabrera for the Tigers Hayden Cantrell for the Brewers Alex Santos for the Astros Shaling Lears for the Braves Nick Garcia for the Pirates Grayson Rodriguez for the Orioles Xavier Warren for the Brewers and our first color is Keoni Kavako To 99 for the Minnesota Twins Matt Arnold and a lyric Sulaire bow and first aqua 7 out of 20 for the Minnesota Twins and Man Arnold There you go. Nice one for Matt A lyric Sulaire. I think we're second third second second round 59th overall Keoni Kavako was last year first round. I want to say was he 14? 13 Is that a gold this time? I think that's gold. I'm gonna say golden green this time Nicoladolo for the Reds Austin Wells for the Yankees Warner Blakely for the Angels Justin Fosquay for the Rangers Steven Surrey Tristan Casas for the Red Sox Max Meier for the Marlins Third overall pick there Alexander Kanario for the Giants Thomas Suggies for the Rangers Ben Hernandez for the Royals Zach McCambley for the Marlins Aaron Ashby for the Brewers Liam Norris for the A Sorry Diamondbacks Jason Dominguez for the Yankees Walter Lutz last spot mojo and Joe Ryan for the Braves Gage Workman Tiger Brady McConnell Royals Jared Jones for the Pirates Bailey Horn for the White Sox Broke Haraway Cubs Logan Hoffman Pirates Slays the Coney Diamondbacks Jaren Duran Red Sox Matthew Dyer Mets Coney Kovacco for the Twins Michael Bush Dodgers Tyler Savastrum A's Eric Ainge Case William Rockies Reed Netmer's Angels DL Hall for the Orioles and Heston Kerstat for the Orioles John Dunneen and It is a gold 2 out of 15. Chris McMahon bowman first for the Rockies Joshua Kennen and Tink Hents green bowman first 250 for the Cardinals That is John Samuelson boxhawk Good luck. So the gold is the lowest we've seen so far Maybe we got a yellow on a green this time unless it's Same yellow, I'll think that's good Austin Hendrick for the Reds Osvaldo Praza Yankees Pete Crow Armstrong Mets John Samuelson Bryson Stock Phillies Jackson Miller Red Jackson Rutledge Nationals Gilberto Amenas Red Sox Ronnie Maricio Mets Niko Holscher for the Rays Owen Miller Indians Zach Vien for the Royals That one I'm sorry Rockies Joshua Kennen Ryan Jansen Cubs Nick York Red Sox and Geraldo Perdomo for the Dimebacks Jay Groom Red Sox Casey Schmidt Giants George Kirby Mariners Mike Siani Reds Gerard Connolly on Marlins David Calderies Angels Nolan Gorman Cardinals Levi Prater Cardinals Hans Kraus Rangers Ed Howard Cubs Trevor Lornaq twins Robert Assel for the Padres That one is Alex Valasacos Elliott Ramos Giants Kyle Nikolas Marlins J. J. Goss Rays and Ian Seymour for the Rays our first color yellow Jordan Groscians 66 out of 99 for the Blue Jays Matt Arnold and Aaron Ashby 11 out of 50 for the Brewers and Mark Bassett He's in it. It's just hard to find and our last box Yeah, I know Maybe maybe here last box mojo. Looks like we got an orange and a yellow Adam Seven Eris Angels Jimmy Glowanky Giants Nicola Reds Austin Wells Yankees Werner Blakely Angels Justin Flosquay Rangers Steven Surrey Tristan Costas Red Sox Max Meyer for the Marlins Mark Pissette Miguel Amaya Cubs Chris McMahon Rockies Ajay Bukovic Diamondbacks Tristan Lutz Brewers Carter Bommler Orioles Nick Ben Hernandez Royals Thomas Stegees Rangers and Zach McCandley for the month Logan Hoffman for the Pirates Slade Zaconi Diamondbacks Jaren Duran Red Sox Garrett Mitchell Brewers first from Mitchell I've seen in the last out of the ten boxes Mark Bassett for the Brewers Corbin Carroll Diamondbacks Daxon Fulton Marlins Colt Keith Tigers Brice Bonin for the Reds Hunter Green for the Reds Holden Powell for the Nationals Adley Rushman for the Orioles Tyler Brown that Adley goes to John Denine Tyler Brown for the Astros Ryan Rollsson for the Rockies and Justin Lange for the Padres and our first color is Logan Allen Orange the 25 for the Cleveland Indians Ryan Lind and Gage Workman 68 out of 99 for the Tigers and Eric Ainge the spot he won for having two or more teams So there you go guys that was the break That was Bowman draft sapphire five blocks break pick your team number 10 from jaspyscasebreaks.com More in the store now jaspyscasebreaks.com. I'm Sean. Thanks for hanging out and I'll see you next time


Two local towns are still in the running for Minnesota Monthly's best town in Minnesota. Walker and Bemidji are in the top five communities that are classified as a special place to live in or visit. Bemidji is deemed the first city on the Mississippi and is the central hub for several Indian reservations. Walker has a total population under 1,000 but is home to Leech Lake, the third largest lake in Minnesota. The winner will be announced on November 30th. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


This session is Sharon Burke, who's the former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy. She's also, she runs the resource security program at New America. And she and Louis Palau will be discussing the future of conflict in the Arctic in 2030. Over to you, Sharon. Thank you very much, Peter, and I'm always delighted to be here at your conference and as part of the New America team. So we have some pictures for you and I'm going to introduce my guests in just a moment. Whenever the slide comes up, we'll be able to see when it's up. We're going to start with a poll. So get your thumbs ready. We have a polling question for you, which I can't see if it's up. There we go. Okay. The question, which I also cannot see, is what is the state of conflict in the Arctic in 2030? So use your imaginations. Multilateral peace arrangement, A, B is U.S. and allies dominate, C, Russia dominates, D, war between the great powers. So give us your honest answer right now, and the texting instructions are up there at the top. And in real time, we should be able to see your answers. It'll give Louie and I a great starting point, so we look forward to your participation. While you're voting, I'm just going to take a minute to introduce my guest here. Louie Palau is an award-winning photojournalist and documentarian. He often covers conflicts. You'll have to explain to us why. But he spent five years embedded in Kandahar, so five years. He's covered the drug wars in Mexico, in fact, as a New America fellow at the time, I believe. He's just finished a documentary on Ukraine. So he's a very experienced photojournalist in these areas. And the reason he's here with us today is that he's also covered the Arctic. And I will tell you more about that in a moment. We're watching your poll results come in. U.S. and allies dominate 36 percent. So an interesting distribution, though. I would say... It keeps changing. It keeps changing. It's like watching an election. Sort of. Okay. How interesting. Wow. You're not sure. It's the caffeine. As a collective, the one thing you don't think, only 13 percent, think a war between the Great Powers and the Arctic in 2013. Otherwise... Wow, look at that. Russia dominates. It's like a game of risk. All right.  All right. Look at that. The war between the Great Powers. Oh, it's going down. It's going up. Okay. Let's call it at that. An interesting result. Multilateral peace arrangement is the top. Russia dominates more than U.S. and allies don't need it. It's like very tempting to skew the voting by making comments on how you're voting, but we'll get there. Okay. So, that's great. Let's go to the opening for our presentation. To the first slide. So the Arctic. I think there's a little delay when the slide would click the clicker. I'm going to start talking and soon... Oh, I think... There we go. This is an actual photograph from the polar orbiting satellite. It was the first picture from the new polar orbiting satellite that Noah posted last year in 2018. That is the North Pole in winter. That is the Arctic. And, of course, what you can't see in the middle of winter is that since 1979 with the satellite measurements, the Arctic has lost 40% of its ice. It is melting faster than in any time in recorded history. It is now the projections have been updated. It's believed that the Arctic will be ice free in the summer months as soon as 2030. So think about where you were in 2009, 2008, and how recent that seems to you. This is going to be ice free in the summer months by 2030. Now, of course, an Arctic summer is a whole other thing, right? You're talking about three weeks in September, so don't get too excited. We're going to get there. Yeah. I'm very fortunate to have Louis Paluhier as my guest. He's a phenomenal photojournalist who has covered conflict in many theaters. He's very experienced at this. Well, for National Geographic, a forthcoming issue in the fall, he went to the Arctic. He was embedded in the Arctic. So he's going to tell us more about what he saw and more to the point he's going to show us what he saw. This is an unusual point of view. We see these pictures, often with a red line that shows you just how much the ice is retreated, and what that means. So what does it mean? It means an entirely new theater of operations, not just for the five littoral states and the three near-littoral states, but for lots of others, including China. The Coast Guard put out a brand new strategy last week that's pretty forward-leaning and aggressive for the Coast Guard especially, that starts on the first page by mentioning there's a trillion dollars worth of minerals in this area, a billion dollars worth of undiscovered oil, 30% of the world's remaining natural gas is in this region, a billion dollars, I think, in fishing, a million square miles of U.S. territory, and a whole new ocean to patrol, a whole new transpolar route, which is why the Chinese are so very interested and have made many scientific moves through the region. The Russians have 50% of the ocean of the Arctic coastline, I believe, and the northern sea route. They have something like 40 heavy icebreakers, and last week the U.S. Congress, I believe, approved a new heavy icebreaker for the United States, that's $700 million. So the Arctic, some people are saying, a lot of people in this room may be thinking it's the new great game. But Louis has a really unusual point of view on this because he's literally been on the ground, this is ground truth. So we're going to hear from him now and what he has to say. OK, first of all, Louis, tell us what brought you to the Arctic from Kandahar and Ukraine and all these places. What made you go there and when did you start going there? I've always been interested in geographic spaces and how people compete for these geographic spaces and what the reality is when you hit it and all the best laid plans don't come to pass and looking at history. And so in 1993, when I arrived, these are the three things kind of going on. There's a diamond discovery. I got sent up there in 1993. It's multi-billion dollar mining now in Canada. No one ever thought to be diamonds in Canada. I was always thought they'd be in Africa or other parts of the world. I arrived and there had been a bombing, a minor planet of bomb and kill nine people out of gold mine during a labor dispute. So we think about conflict and security. It's more than just like big armies lining up to have a battle. Security is a lot of different things that are local security. So how do you think, how do people usually imagine the Arctic as a place where people have... Polar bears, ice, and no one lives there and outdated ideas of indigenous people mostly. And then a year later, Canada opens fire on a Spanish fishing vessel over and it just talked about resources and competition for resources. So tell us where you went. This is a map of places that Louis has been or is going to be. So that was 1993. Just on this project, the red lines I've sailed most of the Northwest Passage, I've made about 20 field trips, some being several months, some on foot, some with local Inuit soldiers, snowmobiles, you name it, I've been on it. The red is where I've been, the green is up what's upcoming. The blue is past trips that relate to this and the green is what's coming up next. And so what do most people think of when they think of this region? They have an image in their minds? They have invented narratives usually because what I find the Arctic is a place that's defined by what our desires want it to be. We want it to be about oil, how we better hurry up and go up there and get ready for the oil where most of the oil is inaccessible, we need to know where it is. I also think that the Arctic is this blank slate for invented narratives. There's lots of mining. It's like most of the resources are on people's countries land already. So I think that that's what I think we need to keep in mind. It's a lot of invented narratives because the Arctic, it's an unprecedented moment. Unlike other places in the world where there's our histories, like when I went to Afghanistan, we'd hear centuries of history. This is how it was for this country, so it was for the British or the Russians. There is no this is how it was for the Arctic. So tell us what it looks like on the ground, ground truth, as a potential theater of operations. Tell us what we're looking at. I'm on a Danish Navy vessel here outside the Lucille at Fjord. This is the Fjord actually where the iceberg that sank the Titanic came from.  And I also think that if you're training for the military to go in the Arctic, no matter what you're doing, you can't just do a year of training and pass it on to the next person. It's decades and centuries of knowledge that you have to pass on. So this is what we would call ice-free, right? Yeah, that's ice-free, yeah. Right. So tell us what this is. This is just near Fort Greeley in Alaska. I call it the largest unsingable aircraft carrier in the world. It's like this big peninsula of the military presence there is huge and they're constantly training. It just talks about all the paratrooper US Army. And it's just all this planning and training. And in the end, the ultimate power in the world is not military, but nature up there. So you're saying these guys can't just literally drop in. They have to be training up there all the time. Well, you could, yeah, and it's constant training. You can't just do basic training suddenly appear in the Arctic. I mean, when it's minus 60, try starting a snowmobile. So tell us what that looks like. Minus 60? So, yeah, and then these are US Marines and Green Berets training to go to Norway. This is in Barrow. And it's about two months of darkness. So you can't just plan about technical stuff. You got to plan about emotional and psychological effects on your troops. And can they operate every day? And are they from a part of the United States that makes them even possible to operate in the Arctic? So it's an incredibly harsh climate. Right, that's true. He's from Canada, so he knows what that's like. I'm from Los Angeles. My family's from the Mojave Desert. This is scary for us. Well, I'm the kind of guy. I grew up ice fishing as a kid. So jumping in the water in the ice seemed normal to me. But even you, 60 below. So this climate is going to be harsh for a long time. Well, it's a part of the world where the air can kill you. I mean, it's minus 60.  And this is also a training? This is pilots training. Most of these pilots are fighter pilots. These are Canadian, UK, and French training in Resolute Bay. There's a special training area up there. It's one of the most gnarly training areas in the world.  And these are all these parts of knowledge you need to learn to operate up there that I think is beyond just going to basic training and then going up, operating in the Arctic. I've seen a lot of really skilled warfighters go up to the Arctic and not want to be there anymore and not being able to operate up there because the air gives you frostbite. I mean, there's a lot of things to understand. So who's important for them? Well, you should say what we're looking at here, but also as a clue. This is search and rescue training. This is in Clyde River. Canada has and has had for a long time a lot of an Inuit reservist unit called the Canadian Rangers. And they're in every community. And you think of community-based security and community-based knowledge. Not far different from having key leader engagements under any elders in Afghanistan. It's the same thing. The Inuit are the greatest scientists of the Arctic. They have observational facts and oral histories that talk about what's changing and how things are up there for centuries. So I spent months with Inuit soldiers in the Arctic. And that's what this is as well, right? Yeah, so Canada's military has integrated indigenous knowledge into training for survival and understanding the environment that they're working in. It's kind of mandatory training. They also have a course called the Arctic Operations Advisors course. And you're seeing the renewal of interesting cold weather training in Alaska as well as this is becoming a part of operations in the Arctic. So let's go full circle and come back to the polling question. So there's a lot of attention about, you know, Russia's got all these icebreakers. They're putting down new bases or rehabbing their old bases. The United States new icebreaker. The Canadians, of course, have long history along with indigenous populations of operating and training in the region. Who wins by 2030? You know, is it going to be the Russians? Is it going to be the US and allies? Or from what you said, the Arctic itself wins by 2030. It's a difficult place to operate. Yeah, I mean, I think the most powerful weapon or tool in the Arctic is a nuclear submarine. I don't need an icebreaker. I'll just sail under the ice or airpower. I mean, I can fly anywhere. I have to say I've done a lot of stuff at the US Air Force. A lot of incredible knowledge retained there, even for supporting scientists to do research because only the US Air Force can get to certain places, like, say, in Greenland. So I think that this idea, again, I would just, everybody needs to understand for me if there's ever a battle space or, I don't even like using that, because the idea of a shooting war in the Arctic is almost preposterous to me. Why? Because people will, I have this great quote from a general up, Joint Task Force North. If anyone tried attacking over the pole, it'd be the largest search and rescue operation in the history of the world. Now, I know that there are northern projections of power, but there are anxieties over the continued east-west tensions. And that involves, the Arctic is a very big place, but the Arctic is 100 different places. The Arctic, in Finland, I could drive a really nice car from my hotel right into the Arctic, and I can go do yoga in the morning. In Canada, you can't do that. The Arctic is a lot of different places.  So you think, in other words, by 2030, the reality of this place is not going to be significantly different. No, and it's the greatest. It's a very harsh theater of operation. It is, and it is the greatest place of the unknowns on the planet. And our ability, for the United States, our ability to operate up there is unchanged in the sense that it's been, for some time now, submarines and air power largely. Yeah, I think that. But so you said search and rescue, and I know that was a joke and a comment on the aspirations. But in fact, that is one of the growing missions up there, because you can get, especially through the northern sea route, but you've gone through the Northwest passage, right? Yeah. What was that like? I think there are five May days within the first week I was up there, from everything from, I'm not kidding, a Spanish, no, it's not Spanish. Mexican sailing boat, they thought they could sail through up there, and they hit up. And then a cruise ship with scientists got stuck because things aren't mapped out up there. I think that there are ideas floated around, and sometimes I think we think it's about fighting other countries, but I also think it's about, the military can protect the environment. Everybody talks about oil. I think fishing is going to be far more important. It's food. It's what we really need. There's no alternative to food. They're alternative to oil. And I think that what does a country think of their economy when someone else who has lower environmental standards sails and leaks oil into someone's fishing grounds and affects that, or someone fishes just off your 200-mile limit and starts depleting your fish stocks like what collapsed the cod fishery in Canada in the 90s. So this is a place of unknowns, and the trajectory it follows is almost the only thing we can be certain of is it's not going to be what we expect. As a longtime defense community person, the last thought I want to leave you with is that 2030, ice-free in the summer, still means it's a very harsh environment that's mostly frozen most of the time. If it does melt faster and sooner, I would just remind my national security colleagues, don't forget what that actually means. This is climate change. And if it's happening faster, you've got bigger problems than the transpolar route that's opening up. I want to leave you with that thought. And Louie, thank you so much for sharing your brown truth. Good, thanks.