text:
Andrew Ross Sorkin's Bad Math on AIG
Posted on September 11, 2012 by Yves Smith
Memo to Andrew Ross Sorkin: if you are going to try to discredit someone, it's more effective if you are less obvious about it.
Having missed out on gang attack on Neil Barofsky on the CNBC show Squawk Box (where Sorkin normally acts as co-host) that prompted a general take-down of CNBC's reporting bias by Columbia Journalism Review, Sorkin apparently decided to get his own digs in. His latest article, "Plot Twist in the A.I.G. Bailout: It Actually Worked" is a unabashed effort at a twofer: a recitation of pet Administration talking points (the piece starts with a quote from the White House) and an attack on a high profile critic.
I'll be doing a longer form treatment later on the recent, clearly Administration-driven "the TARP worked" PR campaign. As far as the Sorkin contribution to this initiative is concerned, it's an example of how the Treasury and bank defenders will try all sorts of creative accounting and will conveniently ignore their own past work to pass off Big Lies deemed to be important.
Sorkin (and one has to assume the Administration) is now trying a new angle on "the TARP made money" canard by arguing that the way to look at the investment is by treating the Fed/Treasury "investment" jointly, as opposed to looking at the TARP (Treasury program) in isolation. That is just another exercise in three card monte. If you are going to include Fed actions, you need to look at them in aggregate, and not cherry pick the ones that suit your case. The Fed's apparent recouping of its "investment" in garbage barges like Maiden Lane 2 and 3 results from its extraordinary interventions to goose the prices of financial assets, including the alphabet soup of special facilities during the crisis, ZIRP, and QE and QE2. These represent a considerable transfer of wealth away from savers to financial institutions, by design. The most colorful account of how this worked comes from Steve Waldman:
Suppose my kid's meth habit got the best of him. He's needs to come up with $100K quick or his dealer's gonna whack him. But he's a good kid, really! Coulda happened to anyone. So I "lend" him the money, even though he has no visible means of support and the sketchiest loan sharks in town wouldn't give him the time of day. Now I believe in bootstraps and hard work, individualism and self-reliance. So I tell my son. "Son, you are going to pay me back every penny of that loan. You are going to work it off. I have arranged with one of my golf buddies, a guy who owes me a favor or three, a job that pays $200K a year. You'd better show up every day at 9 a.m. and sit behind that desk, and get me back my money!" And he does! After a year, he's made me whole. What a good kid.
No bail out, right? He paid me back every penny! Worked it off!
Bullshit. The opportunity I provided him, the $200K job that he would not have received without my intercession, was a huge grant. On the open market, if I were to accept bribes from the highest bidder to wangle the job from my friend, that opportunity would be worth more than the $100K advanced. I paid my son's loan with my own money. I just obscured the cash flows, so my son and I can pretend and sustain our mutual self-regard and our righteous disdain for the moochers and the hippies and the riff-raff.
In the Sorkin article, the article revolves around a MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over) inducing argument of which share price for AIG is the right one to use for determining whether the government got the dough it put at risk in TARP back (never mind the point that Waldman, your truly, and numerous others have made: that merely paying the money back is also a big gimmie, given that the banks wrecked the global economy and no private party would have given them funds at anything other than extremely tough terms when the financiers were on death's door). Barofsky contends that the price is over $43 a share (above the Treasury's latest sales price of $32.50) while Sorkin repeats Treasury's claim that the price (by throwing in the Fed's three card monte "profits") is really $28.73.
But buried in the article, Sorkin concedes Barofsky's position: "Mr. Barofsky is technically correct that if you isolate the original cost to TARP for its investment in A.I.G., $43.53 a share is the break-even number."
And Sorkin has a convenient episode of amnesia, that his own previous work proves that the Treasury number he flogs in this article is also too low.
In a February article, "Bending the Tax Code, and Lifting A.I.G.'s Profit," Sorkin described how AIG was allowed to retain $26.2 billion of net operating losses that should have been wiped out as a part of the rescue of the company as well as an additional $9 billion of "unrealized loss on investments." That increased AIG's fourth quarter and hence fiscal year earnings by a remarkable $17.7 billion, which dwarfs the mere $1.6 billion its operations produced that quarter. And the article includes this juicy bit:
Analysts at Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase last year estimated that the tax benefits from the losses propped up A.I.G. stock by $5 to $6 a share. Its shares closed at $28.66 on Monday, just shy of the $29 mark that the government says it needs to sell its shares to break even.
So get this: the government break even figure, which it has calculated down to the penny per share, excludes $35 billion of what Sorkin in February called "a tax benefit, er, gift, from the United States government" that goosed the stock price by at least $5. Reverse that out and even using the government's remarkably aggressive view of the matter, the AIG bailout was and remains a turkey.
This entry was posted in Federal Reserve, Media watch, Politics, Regulations and regulators, Ridiculously obvious scams on September 11, 2012 by Yves Smith.
← Bloomberg Ranks Most and Least Miserable States The Poster Child of Austerity is Lost →
Conscience of a Conservative September 11, 2012 at 6:24 pm
Bloomberg just did a story today on Bernanke on how he's going all out on unemployment, like it's a personal vendetta.
So the question is how much are reporters, anchors etc beholden to their publishers or media owners. Of course we know its true on some level, but how much?
Yves Smith Post author September 11, 2012 at 6:29 pm
Google "access journalism". There is a completely separate problem, in that government officials parse out leaks and interviews to reporters that carry their water and freeze out the ones that don't play ball.
Government and CNBC have related agendas here. CNBC wants to show that Banks and related firms are doing well and don't need gov't regulation or future bail-outs and the Gov't wants to show the bail-outs worked and were profitable.
JEHR September 11, 2012 at 6:49 pm
Yves, I did google "access journalism" and found a great website of the Canadian Association of Journalists ( http://www.caj.ca/?p=692 ). There a found a list of all the many ways that the Harper government keeps secrets and denies access to journalists. As I have suspected for some time now Our Democracy is in Deep Trouble!
bobh September 11, 2012 at 7:10 pm
Sorkin's brand of "access journalism" has mostly involved high ranking corporate miscreants. He gets access to the mighty and pays them back by putting their BS in the Times as news.
jake chase September 12, 2012 at 1:41 pm
Sorkin is such a toadying putz that even watching him with the sound off makes me grind my teeth. Nobody on CNBC has ever told the truth in the nine years I have been watching it. It is corporate propaganda from morning to night and sometimes I wonder if the prices are fake too.
hermanas September 12, 2012 at 5:08 pm
"It's nice to have friends in high places."
JamesW September 11, 2012 at 6:50 pm
Interesting to note that all those Swedes involved in anti-WikiLeaks/Assange activities are also financially connected to the rightwing Bonnier family, owner of Bonnier AB, among the 10 largest global media corporations.
http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/suspicious.pdf
briansays September 11, 2012 at 6:35 pm
since mitt has said he would fire zimbabwe ben i assume he will do what ever to help obama and geitner will enable
printing presses running
ask the investors in goldman's "crap" who got 100 cents on the dollar at timmy's insistance we wouldn't want them to have to take any haircut
and maria at cnbc really seems to have a thing for the old fart at AIG who was president who was allowed to cash out at 100 percent defending him against spitzer
what is it maternal instinct or old man/sugar
daddy fantasy??
TK421 September 11, 2012 at 8:54 pm
Maria's married to an investment banker, so she probably just loves money-men.
And while it would be hilarious to see Bernanke and Foamy swept out of their jobs, they'd likely end up with two of the biggest, shiniest golden parachutes in history.
Jim September 12, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Maria? Married?
I thought that she cost Cit's Todd Thomson his job.
DP September 12, 2012 at 9:06 am
I recall Maria fawning over Sandy Weill (it could not be fairly called an interview, she behaved like a Citi PR flak) years ago, well before the financial collapse and she made sure to tell Sandy that she owned stock in Citi.
And there's also the issue that Joe Kernan is married to a Squawk Box producer. So is Becky Quick; a few years ago she left her husband and her producer left his wife and kids so they could be together. They are now married.
CNBC apparently has no policies whatsoever in areas like access journalism (except perhaps to encourage it), nepotism, supervisors having relationships with subordinates, reporters owning stocks in companies they report on, or how guests are treated. If the New York Times was still a serious newspaper it would have let Wall Street water carrier Sorkin that if he went to work for CNBC he could no longer write for the Times.
The Times was never a serious newspaper. Now it isn't even a newspaper. It prints Administration PR, corporate PR, toady opinions, and letters from illiterates. I am amazed that anyone reads it, but I suppose it is useful to people who need to be told what to think.
dirtbagger September 12, 2012 at 9:59 pm
Now I understand why Kernan, the village idiot, is still on squawk box. Watching it in the early AM when the occasional insomnia attack strikes, Joe acts like he is loaded on crank or coke. He continually interrupts his guests and just can't shut up. Wouldn't be so annoying if he had anything of consequence to convey to the audience.
mac September 11, 2012 at 6:42 pm
Why does it take so many words to say "the government gave money to AIG and the taxpayers have to eat the loss"?
Are those of you who oppose the Fed's bailout of AIG equally against the ECB's bailout of the hedge funds holding peripheral debt.
Arguably, the Fed's bailout of AIG will cost the US taxpayer FAR LESS than the ECB's bailout of the periphery will cost taxpayers in northern Europe.
Guy Fawkes September 11, 2012 at 6:47 pm
After reading Sorkin's propaganda book, I read his articles with better knowledge that they are not, in fact, journalism. They are propaganda. And he even does propaganda bad.
Peasant Pinguin Society September 11, 2012 at 7:22 pm
Two minutes have already passed since President Obama, Lloyd Blankfein, Jamie Dimon, Robert Rubin, and Hank Paulson arrived at the theater.
Oh, and last but not least, Joseph Cassano arrived, flush with the $300 million he got from AIG, having just flown in from his huge Townhouse, near Harrod's, in London.
All at once the curtains opened, and the stage appeared, completely transformed.
The center was occupied by a staircase, and at the top of the staircase was the unattached head of a 35 year old male, placed on a wide red disk with a metal armature that held it upright: THIS IS Andrew Ross Sorkin.
The stage assistant, holding this solid red disk with Sorkin's Head in both hands, showed Obama and company the bodiless Head, which began to jabber gaily in the most inventive way possible. With every word Sorkin's prominent lower jaw emitted a slobbery spray of spittle that, spewing in a shower from his mouth, landed in front of the President's feet.
Sorkin Head: "the TARP made money!! AIG was a great deal for the taxpayer!! Treasury turned a profit of $12.4 billion on the AIG bailout"… and so forth…"
We could find none of the customary subterfuges used in the classic talking head routine. There was no system of mirrors hidden under the disk, which the stage assistant manipulated freely and without any suspect precautions.
Next the stage assistant walked to the edge of the stage and offered the round plate to whoever wanted it.
Blankfein took a few steps forward to receive the Sorkin Head, Dimon picked it up and laughed, and they passed it from hand to hand. With each spectator, the unattached Head carried on a brief, impromptu, and droll conversation, related to the success of TARP or the AIG bailout. Some held the Head at arm's length, trying to avoid the astounding sprays of sputum flying from the prodigy's mouth.
After making the rounds, the unattached Sorkin Head was handed back to the stage assistant, who had remained onstage. Immediately the stage assistant pressed a hidden catch that opened the red box, which in reality was composed of two parts held together by a thin hinge. The lower disk dropped in a vertical profile and below this, wearing a flesh-colored leotard, now hung a minuscule human body that had been able to fit in the narrow hiding place of the hollow plate, barely an inch thick.
This sudden vision completed the person of Andrew Ross Sorkin, a loquacious dwarf, displaying an outsized head. Still talking and spraying spittle, "TARP made money!" "AIG was good for the taxpayer!" the astounding chatterbox gesticulated freely with his puppetlike limbs.
As the stage assistant carried him off into the wings, the dwarf gripped a foot in each hand, and disappeared in a final gibe, but not before launching huge droplets of his abundant saliva far afield, landing, once again, just in front of the President's feet.
You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll kiss billions of dollars goodbye.
Howard Beale IV September 11, 2012 at 11:23 pm
I much prefer Vir Cotto's take on the whole "what do You Want?": question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0n2vurSBIQ
jim beene September 12, 2012 at 8:17 am
Great thought; shame it's against the law.
Robin Hood September 11, 2012 at 7:43 pm
What a messed up century this is. In my time, when you cut a Joker's head off, they stay dead!
Karl September 11, 2012 at 8:18 pm
The real problem with his article is that it's trying to change the entire focus. In the end it doesn't matter if the government made or lost money whatever the accounting you want to use. The government should be in the business of doing what's best for the country. Even if you think TARP was a reasonably decent response to a dire situation, the focus now should be on what government can do to fix the source of the problems. If they can put everything behind them by saying that they turned a profit and everything worked out for the best, then they ignore fixing the financial system.
This is all a distraction to try to keep people from realizing that nothing has been done about the banks and our financial system! It's much better for Obama to have people arguing about accounting then pointing to how little has been done.
scraping_by September 11, 2012 at 10:50 pm
True enough. It's all sales patter, but it's empowering to us marks if we see the lies. Makes cutting back to the real question, of public money converted to private good with no compensation, a quicker process.
The problem is debt currency in the end and very few even mention.
SR6719 September 11, 2012 at 10:17 pm
As jsmith might have said (if he or she were still around) anyone who believes a single word from Andrew Ross Sorkin is an effing moron.
"For a lie to work it must be shrouded in truth." –The Master, from Doctor Who: "The Trial Of a Time Lord".
PQS September 11, 2012 at 11:25 pm
I heard this "AIG made money" story on the radio tonight, and my BS meter immediately went off.
Glad to know I wasn't just paranoid.
I can just imagine what Matt Taibbi will say about this Latest Lie.
Charlie Gasparino September 11, 2012 at 11:38 pm
He did it, he finally stole my byline.
"reporting live from under the table and between the legs of the biggest names on wall st.
Geoff September 12, 2012 at 2:36 am
AIG = CIA = bottomless head of state = headless state of bottom
Keep those guillotines sharp and oiled.
psychohistorian September 12, 2012 at 3:59 am
Nice post Yves.
Its too bad Big Liers like Sorkin don't have their karma get them soon enough.
EMT September 12, 2012 at 7:04 am
Yves: this fascination with the math of the Treasury's "return" on its investment in AIG on your part is the ultimate forest for the trees. Barofsky to his credit is also making a bigger point about the hasty and almost exclusive focus of TARP dollars on banking and not on housing which while obvious, has the virtue of truth. But his incessant ranting over the accounting of Treasury's returns on its investment is schoolboy stuff, just taunting by a bully with a pulpit you and the press have given him.
And the point is what? That saving the banks from collapse (and from taking your savings, investments, pensions and insurance policies with them) cost the taxpayers money? This just in! Breaking news! Or that it shouldn't have cost any money, that taxpayers should have made a return because Government programs should be run like Blackstone investments so that when Government invests it should target an IRR rather than the achievement of a chosen policy objectives? and failure to meet those IRRs should be grounds for impeachment?
The math is simple: on "TARP" accounts solely, the breakeven price is $45. taking into account the "gift" to the Treasury of the shares it received from the AIG Trust (set up to hold "for the benefit of the Treasury" the shares received by the Fed as a commitment fee for the Credit Facility it extended in 2008 to AIG), the breakeven price is $28.73. Since those trust shares were a "gift", the Treasury has no "basis" in those shares and so its "gain" on their sale is equal to the entire sales price of those shares. Therefore, taking into account its zero basis and its $45 dollar basis shares, its overall breakeven price is $28.73. That's the math. Neal can say Treasury is selling its TARP shares at a loss at $32.50 with conviction but then he's also got to acknowledge that when Treasury sells its AIG Trust zero basis shares at $32.50, it is doing so with huge gains that more than offset the loss on the TARP shares.That's the truth which his self promoting "i am the only truth teller in a sea of corruption" carping about "returns" is intended to obscure.
On counting the Fed and Treasury "returns" together, yes, they are separate institutions and there are separate accounts for each of their activities. But since the Fed's "profits" are turned over every year to the Treasury and the AIG rescue was a joint production between Treasury and the Fed (in which they cooperated in on how the rescue and on how the exit from that funding were structured to protect each of them to the greatest extent possible), it's not mere "spin" to look at how they did on a consolidated basis. Yes, the AIG rescue cannot be looked at in isolation from the broader effort made to keep all of its major counterparties from failing as well (TARP, TALF, TAF, CPP, CAP, TLGF,etc.), or in isolation from the tax regulations that allowed them (and GM) to keep their NOLs, despite the "change of control" that would otherwise have limited (not forfeited) their "value".
But after all those caveats, AIG didn't fail (and take its creditor/investors and policyholders and derivative counterparties with them), the USG spent a ton of money avoiding that failure and on a consolidated basis the USG got all the money its spent on AIG back. Those are the facts.
Barofsky may think the money should have been spent on mortgage principal reduction or interest rate relief or on a new Homeowner Loan Corporation; the right and the left may think the banks should all have been left to fail, letting the chips fall where they may.
But that's not what happened. What happened was the Bush Administration decided to bail out the banks. By the time Obama got into office the USG had committed over $7 trillion of taxpayer money to the banking system to keep it from collapse. Obama and the folks at his Treasury Department were handed those cards and played them as best they could, continuing those policies and trying to minimize the losses to the Government from that sunken investment in the banking system.
Getting the taxpayers' money back from AIG was better than the alternative of losing it, no? Or would it have been better for the ideologues who opposed the bailout for the money to have been lost so the public's outrage could continue to be stoked? Is it possible that this more positive than anticipated outcome just doesn't fit the narrative you have been selling for four years and you are propping up Barofsky's silly accounting points to keep that failed narrative alive?
Bert_S September 12, 2012 at 8:38 am
Thankyou for defining the New and Improved Bernanke-Geithner Put. Greenspan just cut interest rates whenever something blew up on his watch.
So you give us the false choice of Bailout or Shoot Ourselves in the Foot – or somewhere worse.
If this was a one time thing and we were "fixing the system so that this can never happen again" – Geithner's words around TARP time – I would say ok, we learned our lesson and that was the price of education.
But where are the fixes?
Don't say Dodd-Frank.
Michael Olenick September 12, 2012 at 10:43 am
Since when is the US Government an investment bank? It is not the government's job to make money. If it were then the opportunity costs Yves addresses would come into play. They are using a triple standard. On one hand they argue that by saving AIG (and the rest) they fulfilled a public policy, and that since they're the government they need not address opportunity cost. On the other hand, they're arguing that they made money, the job of an investment bank.
Finally, and most importantly, while they were massively intervening to prop up the banks they entirely ignored the counter-parties to all those mortgages, the borrowers, going so far as to screech "free market" during evictions. However, every banker knows that if those "illiquid" assets — which weren't illiquid at all, just not worth much — were sold on the open market to vulture investors that there would have been plenty of room for the vultures to refi and still make a mint. That would have quickly deleveraged an enormous amount of middle class debt. They could have even given people a first right of refusal to buy their own loans, for cash, at a small premium to what they fetched at auction.
Would this have destroyed the world as we know it? It would have nuked the existing banks, and many large irresponsible businesses — think GE, who thanks to their loan-sharking operation at GE Capital almost missed payroll — but it also would have freed up an enormous amount of spending capital. People who work for big businesses may have lost their jobs, but thanks to outsourcing many of those losses would have been in India and China, not the US. Arguably the net macroeconomic effect would have been a net positive, for most people and for the overall economy, as the market redistributed the wealth from the wealthiest to everybody else, with little or no government intervention.
While it's oftentimes attributed to Goebbels it was actually Lenin that originally said tell a lie often enough and people will believe it, though whereas Goebbels saw that as a strategy Lenin was explaining how people were being misled about basic economics. That is, there is nothing new about this tactic. Yes, AIG would have failed, and so would many of their counterparties. That's why it's called "investing."
Obama decided to throw good money after bad, continuing an unjustifiable public policy that is the worst of both world's. He broke market discipline, distorted private contracts in favor of the party who had the most information and experience entering into it, then lied about it.
It's called socialism for the rich, free enterprise for the poor. The Fed was created to engineer it; the National Security State was created to maximize it. All the analysis is just opera.
monday1929 September 12, 2012 at 1:24 pm
EMT concedes that the Banks failed and almost took the System with it. Of course the welfare-queen recipients ie. the Socialist bankers like Jamie Dimon still deny they needed any bailout. They have this routine down to a science- admit we are at "the edge of a precipice" when a trillion or so is needed, like Hank "the vomiter" Paulson did, then talk about the Profits from the rescue and green shoots. EMT has also conceded, inadvertently, that the Systemically Dangerous Institutions do need to be broken up and scattered to the wind.
What narrative has EMT been selling for the past four years?
ohmyheck September 12, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Um, because, not accounted for in the so called "profit-making" are the back-door bailouts? See, that was easy…
Back-Door Bail-Outs, you ask? Here, let The Bears essplen it to ya.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yipV_pK6HXw&feature=related
Cap Vandal September 12, 2012 at 6:20 pm
EMT ….
Thanks for a little perspective on this.
The public seems very very concerned about 'what the bailout COST" and "Did the taxpayers get their money back,."
The answer to this is an unequivical yes.,
This particular blog was OBSESSED ovet this issue 4 years ago. And 10's of thousands of lines of invective were based on the assumption that the government wouldn't get their money back.
But …. since it happened, that is no longer the issue. The issue has changed to something entirely different,
Seriously. This blog (as well as virtually the entire nation) assumed that there was NO WAY the AIG assistance would EVER be paid back. Wrong.
Since you can't admit that — then the subject has to be changed to some other issue.
As late at 2011, Barofsky was arguing that Maiden Lane couldn't be taken in isolation — and that any success there had to be offset against what he still assumed would be Treasury losses.
And, last week, Barofsky was arguing that the Fed profits shouldn't be combined with the Treasury 'losses'. But now, Treasury is virtually guranteed to make a positive return on a stand alone basis.
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1704.aspx
Treasury needs another $2.6 billion to 'break even' on a stand alone basis, and ownes 234 million shares of AIG which , at the 32.50 price of the latest public offering, would net them $7.6 billion.
And this $7.6 billion would put the total return at $26.2 billion.
The bottom line being that the Taxpayer broke even on AIG and made a positive return under ANY plausible scenario.
Which was the entire purpose of the bailout. Paulson has stated that he bailed out AIG and not Lehman because he believed that AIG had sufficient assets to pay the government back.
And where did AIG get the cash to pay the government back? Primarily from the owners of AIG — the stockholders — who lost over 90% of their investment. Which is exactly what should have occurred. The owners were wiped out. The senior managers were fired.
Maiden Lane III made a $9.9 billion return — which means there was no 'stealth bailout' –as the counterparties had over $30 billion in collateral PRIOR to Maiden Lane III — to cover what ended up becoming $24 billion in losses. They would have ended up better off on a cash basis by simply keeping the collateral and tearing up the CDS's.
Bailing out AIG would have been a huge success even if it had cost $10's of billions of dollars. An insolvency would have been catastrophic. The fact that it more than broke even has to be considered is an even bigger success.
Bert_S September 12, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Glad you staightened us out there.
LETS DO IT AGAIN AND PAY OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT!!!!!!!
Mr No September 12, 2012 at 9:49 pm
Cap Vandal:
How divorced from reality is this gem: "And where did AIG get the cash to pay the government back? Primarily from the owners of AIG — the stockholders — who lost over 90% of their investment."
The cash came from all of the things Yves cites above (ZIRP, TBTF guarantees, regulatory forbearance, DTA, etc) that propped up AIG's stock price at great cost to savers, future taxpayers, the regulatory system, and the national debt. That AIG's shareholders kept a single penny is an indication of the willingness of Treasury to sell out the broader interest of the country for a positive election year press release. To suggest that legacy equity holders somehow kicked in "cash" to Treasury suggests either an astonishing level of ignorance or a willingness to deceive that one expects to see only in a government flack.
Lloyd C. Bankster September 12, 2012 at 10:18 pm
Cap Vandal,
Do you still have all your teeth?
If so, I recommend a good dentist/doctor named Dr. Benway who can take care of this problem.
Here's a look at Dr. Benway at work, helping to remove Andrew Ross Sorkin's teeth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLGW64oMgRc
Mr No September 12, 2012 at 10:05 pm
Treasury politicized these results in declaring AIG's "profit" as proof of its (meaning TREASURY's) successful handling of the bailout. Having pushed this narrative, is it really "silly" to ask for a level of transparency about the sources of the potential profit, which indicate, as you acknowledge, that the gains came not from Treasury but from the Fed. Treasury could have said that the "government" had a positive return on its AIG investment. But it declared this success because of "Treasury's" investment, part of a broader election year tactic to declare mission accomplished on TARP. From this perspective, it is Treasury that put this question at issue. While Yves is unquestionably correct on why Sorkin's treatment is a dishonest one (including his convenient forgetfulness about the DTAs), simply from the perspective of demanding honesty and transparency from the government, she is also correct to point out the deception that is lurking here.
adwon September 13, 2012 at 1:52 am
That's a nifty treatment of a hypothetical gift tax transaction between Treasury and AIG you have there. I believe you have made an error.
Your treatment of Treasury's shares in AIG as a "gift" is ridiculous on its face. Treasury actually gave money to AIG in exchange for the shares. That is not a gift, that is a sale. A donee may have no basis in his gift, but a buyer's basis is the price he paid.
The error is beside the real point. The value of your example was minimal at best because it really shows nothing at all. Make up any number you like for the basis points, the simple fact that Treasury saved AIG from certain doom does not appear in your calculations. I don't seriously mean you should try to value the rescue in dollars. I just mean that you have mistaken how to properly account for the entire venture. AIG was rescued for a reason and probably not a good one. That being said, the only proper way to value the transaction is whether the policy was both effective as to its stated purpose as well as actually effective (i.e. the same old bull won't happen again, which I suspect it will).
tl;dr – Don't use tax examples if you don't understand the basics.
fresno dan September 12, 2012 at 8:32 am
I agree about TARP. But you know what – I would let them say it made money. Than I would ask, how about making money for the average person – do you not KNOW how to do that, or do you NOT CARE to do that???
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/09/the-middle-class/
http://www.interfluidity.com/v2/2587.html
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/families/
Robert Asher September 12, 2012 at 8:33 am
It is fair to ask why the Bush Administration, whose financial policies were set by the former head of Goldman, Sachs, did not consider alternatives to the TARP program. Note also that the technical experts who advised Paulson were all former employees of large Wall Street banks. Barofsky's main point is not that TARP did not turn a profit: that is a straw horse. Of course he favored New Deal type programs of mortgage relief for homeowners. But Barofsky's main point is the TOTAL lack of concern for the Treasury officials for the massive corruption that existed in the field, as all anti-crisis programs were being executed.And among the corrupt institutions were mortgage companies that were and are subsidiaries of the Wall Street Banks. The Evil Empire is still with it. Why doesn't Luke Skywalker run for President?
Dandelion September 12, 2012 at 10:57 am
How many other businesses failed because of the credit crisis but did not get any "loans" from the government. A nice low interest loan from Uncle Sam might have saved them too. Gee. I wonder why small businesses across America weren't considered too big to fail but instead too small to count. And I wonder if that's one reason these bailouts piss so many off, regardless of how "necessary" their advocates proclaim them to have been.
small businesses across America (the "job creators")were allowed to fail, hence the hypocracy and bankruptcy of America.
Chad M September 12, 2012 at 12:10 pm
I don't see any of these positive reports on AIG talking about the $80B in hand outs to counter-parties via the swap deals. AIG lost 80B less the premium received on that money and there is no way Treasury is including those payouts that were for 100 cents on the dollar rather than at a haircut.
Chad M:
"I don't see any of these positive reports on AIG talking about the $80B in hand outs to counter-parties via the swap deals."
This is accounted for in the Maiden Lane III transactions. As of September 2008, the counterparties already had cash collateral for about $30 billion in losses on the swap deals.
The counterparties then 'sold' the underlying assets to Maiden Lane III for 'fair value' of about $29 billion, funded by a loan of $24 billion from FRBNY and $5 billion AIG contribution.
The amortization of these assets plus the final sales price returned about $10 billion more than the $29 billion 'fair value' @ 9/2008.
The face value of the assets that went into Maiden Lane III was about $62 billion. So the losses on those assets was $23 billion. Or, $62 billion less the $39 billion cash recovery ($39 being the $29 billion from FRBNY and AIG which was repaid + the $10 billion in additional returns).
And where did the $23 billion come from? Indirectly — from the owners/shareholders of AIG at the time of the bailout, who were diluted by over 90%. Which seems about right.
http://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/maidenlane.html
The logic of the 'stealth bailout' argument was primarily that the Fed/Treasury would lose billions on the AIG bailout, and that those 'taxpayer' losses were used ot pay off AIG liabilities that benefitted banks.
And an argument that was made over and over by Barofsky was that the AIG bailout had to be considered in its entirety, and that the banks benefitted — so any loss to the government/taxpayer must be considered a government subsidy to the banks. If the taxpayer is repaid, then any benefit to the banks came from AIG. And, like it or not, AIG did these idiotic deals.
Lloyd C. Bankster September 12, 2012 at 2:29 pm
Nice work, Andrew. Nice work, EMT.
You guys and Steve Liesman just keep doing what you do best, keep giving Barofsky hell along with all the other anti-bailout nutjobs and Wall Street critics.
Or is Barofsky the only critic we have left?
Anyway, give my regards to Joe and Becky and oh, before I forget, sorry 'bout knocking out your front teeth like that. You both have such purty l'il mouths I guess my p*cker got carried away.
But why not use some of that money we give you and hire a dentist to have all your teeth removed?
At least think about it, because that sure would make f*cking you boys in the mouth a lot easier on me, Jamie, Hank, Bob and the rest of the gang.
David Merkel September 12, 2012 at 11:53 pm
Thanks, Yves. Good one.
The far left and the far right were rooting for the TARP funds to have been lost, for different reasons: the right to prove its point that markets should be allowed to clear and self adjust and to let losses be suffered by those who deserved them and the left to prove the point a policy that propped up a financial system that is rotten to its core is a rotten policy.
So the fact that all the TARP money (or most) was retrieved now requires a change in the narrative on the far left and the far right. Barofsky's "acccounting" challenge helps keep the flame burning for both sides but besides the fact that he's wrong, it also tends to highlight that most if not all of the money has been retrieved. Now what?
Yes, i think we should break up institutions that are perceived by policymakers to be too big to fail(because they will bail them out again) or which have the political influence to get the Government to help them avoid failure. Such institutions are bad for democracy and bad for free markets, the functioning of incentives in which have to allow for the possibility and reality of loss.
In the US the top 10 institutions, by assets, all of whom are deeply interconnected in the payment and clearing systems and which together hold 70% of all of the assets of the banking system were all at risk of illiquidity – being unable to fund themselves – in September 2008. But for the Fed, they would have defaulted on massive amounts of debt and other liabilities (like CDS and interest rate swaps and repo) and the system would have frozen NOT cleared. It would have taken years to clear and a decade to recover because 70% of the liabilities of the banking system were also obligations of these institutions, their liabilities being individual's, corporations's and investor's assets: regular folks savings accounts (yes insured by the FDIC), corporate transaction accounts (from which payroll is made and other third party payments) and 401(k), pension management and brokerage accounts. Eventually those bank liabilities would have been repaid at the end of their receiverships, but not immediately when due and the economy would have come to a grinding halt. Hell in the fourth quarter of 2008 it dropped almost 10 percent. that's what the right misses about in its loose talk about "having markets clear": when big institutions fail they don't clear their liabilities after one big asset sale and then a pro rata payout of their liabilities: the asset liquidations go on for years (see RTC). and that's what the left misses about bailing out rotten institutions: those institutions' creditors are actors in the real economy whose inability to get to their deposits and investments and their money in a bank in receivership inflicts hurt on them and the rest of us dependent on their spending, investing and transacting. So when the big guys go down, they take a lot of innocent third parties with them. If institutions holding 70% of the assets and liabilities of the banking system go down, the economy goes down with it.
Everyone should take a deep breath, accept the reality of the deep interconnectedness of all of us to the banking system and then yes we should break the big banks up, we should make the remaining ones more transparent so we all know what we're dealing with and any bank that is the beneficiary of deposit insurance should not be permitted to gamble and any bank that is the beneficiary of lender of last resort funding from the fed should be kept at size where failure is episodic not systemic.
then we won't need EMTs only morticians.


text:
November 22-24, 2021 | London, UK
Programme and Awards
LICE Awards
Conference Format
Extended Abstracts
Sessions Speakers
Posters / Demo
PhD / Doctorate Consortium
Travel and Hotel
LICE-2021
Education | Business | Technology
The COVID-19 has put constraints on our daily life and there is ongoing travel concern in relation to the current pandemic. Taking into consideration the health and safety of all our participants, the London International Conference on Education (LICE-2021) will be held online from the 22nd to 24th of November, 2021.
The LICE promotes collaborative excellence between academicians and professionals from Education. Over the past decade LICE has developed strong networks of leading researchers and pioneers in education worldwide. The aim of LICE is to provide an opportunity for academicians and professionals from various educational fields with cross-disciplinary interests to bridge the knowledge gap, promote research esteem and the evolution of pedagogy. The LICE-2021 invites research papers that encompass conceptual analysis, design implementation and performance evaluation.
https://liceducation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/LICE_Balloon.mp4
All papers submitted for possible presentation at LICE and for publication in the proceedings are subjected to a double-blind, peer review process. Submissions are accepted in English. The LICE-2021 main themes are Global Issues in Education and Research.
View List of Speakers
Who should attend the LICE?
Attended by Undergraduates, Graduates/Postgraduates, Librarians, Study Abroad Advisors, Faculty (Teachers, Lecturers, Researchers, Professors, Head of Department, Deans), Vice-Chancellors, Chancellors, College and University Presidents), Policy Makers and Stakeholders who care deeply about bringing creative, innovative and rigorous learning practices barriers.
The LICE attracts experts from all education sectors, schools, Colleges, Universities, vocational education and training, as well as government representatives, Non-governmental Organization staff and private providers to learn about the current trends and to network with other international colleagues.
Why should I attend LICE?
The national and international annual gathering of Undergraduates, Graduates/Postgraduates, Librarians, Study Abroad Advisors, Faculty (Teachers, Lecturers, Researchers, Professors, Head of Department, Deans), Vice-Chancellors, Chancellors, College and University Presidents), Policy Makers and Stakeholders with background or interest Education.
Networking with national and international participants.
Develop new partnerships and associations with key decision makers across all sectors of education.
Learn about the latest research findings and the future impacts by attending the programmed sessions.
Showcase your products and services and promote your brand at one of the world's top international education conferences.
All the accepted abstracts, extended abstracts and papers will appear in the proceedings and modified version of selected papers will be published in special issues peer reviewed journals and book chapters.
info@liceducation.org
Copyright © 2021 LICE Privacy Policy
Stay updated with all latest updates,upcoming events & much more.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
» Who is liable for an injury at school?
Who is liable for an injury at school?
On Behalf of The Malowitz Law Firm, LLC | Aug 14, 2019 | Injuries, Premises Liability
Accidents can happen anywhere. That includes at schools in Connecticut. While a school is generally a safe place, injuries occur. This may leave you wondering who is liable. Can you sue the school if your child gets hurt while attending? Education Dive explains that liability for injuries at school depends on the situation above all else.
Typical physical injuries depend on what exactly happened and whose negligence led to the injury. The school has the responsibility to provide a safe space, meaning the school is in good repair and there are no hazards that could harm students. If a child, for example, falls due to a broken sidewalk, the school is likely at fault and liable. However, if the child's injury is not due to negligence on the school's part, then there is likely no case against it.
Other situations, such as injuries due to bullying, are even more complicated. The school should do everything possible to protect students from bullying. This includes things that occur outside of school. For example, if the school learns of cyberbullying, it should be treated just like bullying in school. While the injuries from bullying usually are not physical, they still constitute an injury that harms the child, and the school has a responsibility to protect children as much as possible from such harm.
In general, a school must do everything possible to keep children safe, but there are times when even safeguards fail. As in the situation of school shootings or other emergencies. If the school has security procedures in place, then it is not liable when an emergency happens even if injuries occur. This information is for education and is not legal advice.


text:
See Slipknot Play 'Snuff' for First Time in Nearly 10 Years
YouTube - Erynn Halvorson
Well, Corey Taylor wasn't lying when he said Slipknot were going to be dusting off some older songs for their 2022 tour. During their opening show last night (March 16), the band played "Snuff" for the first time in nearly 10 years, and "Dead Memories" for the first time since 2016.
The 'Knot performed a 20-song set for the show, which took place in Fargo, N.D. Aside from the two aforementioned All Hope Is Gone tracks, they also played their latest single "The Chapeltown Rag," which was released in the fall.
"My friends — no, my bad — my fucking family, we are about to play you a song that we have not played live in 13 years. And I can count, on this hand, the amount of times that we played it live," Taylor announced to the crowd before playing "Snuff."
"And we have brought it out simply for you. So if you know it, help me sing."
Watch fan-filmed footage for both "Snuff" and "Dead Memories" below.
According to Setlist.fm, the last time Slipknot played "Snuff" was actually in August of 2012 at the Heavy Montreal festival. Taylor has played it a plethora of times during his solo shows since then, but this is the first time Slipknot have tackled the song live without late drummer Joey Jordison, who left the band in 2013, and tragically died in July of 2021.
"'Snuff' is probably is one of the [songs] that means the most to me now just because of the correlation between it and Paul [Gray]," Taylor told Kerrang! of the song. "Really, if Paul hadn't championed that song, I don't think we would have recorded it. But he loved it and saw the potential with it and really wanted us to do it. So now when I play it during my solo shows, that's who that's for. I try to do it as well as I can."
The first leg of Knotfest, which also features In This Moment and Wage War, continues tomorrow night (March 18) in Omaha, Neb. See the rest of the dates here.
Slipknot - 'Snuff' (Live 2022)
Slipknot - 'Dead Memories' (Live 2022)
Your Guide To Rock + Metal Bands Touring in 2022
Rock + Metal Bands Touring Schedules for 2022
Source: See Slipknot Play 'Snuff' for First Time in Nearly 10 Years
Categories: Metal, Rock News, Videos
Slipknot's Sid Wilson + Kelly Osbourne Welcome Baby Boy
Top 50 Nu-Metal Albums of All-Time
Watch: Powerful Tornado Rips Through South Texas


text:
Leveraging Viet Nam's Social Impact Business Ecosystem in Response to COVID-19 (ISEE-COVID)
The project aims to enhance the resilience of Social Impact Business (SIBs) in Viet Nam and contribute to reducing the impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable groups, especially women and girls. The project will focus on two primary objectives: (i) improving the effectiveness of SIBs, especially those led by women and vulnerable groups, to address the social and gendered impacts of COVID-19 and to accelerate the achievement of the SDGs; and (ii) strengthening the regulatory environment for SIBs to be more gender-responsive, inclusive and transparent, thereby supporting the resilience of SIBs to COVID-19 impacts, with a particular focus on SIBs that are led by women and vulnerable groups. The project will apply an ecosystem approach to tackle the inter-connected and systemic challenges that SIBs face. In particular, it will: (i) improve the capacity of SIBs themselves; (ii) build the capacity of and coordination between SIB intermediaries, and (iii) strengthen government policy-making capacities towards SIBs.
SIB is a model in which businesses adopt a triple bottom line, driving profit, together with social and environmental impact. There are an estimated 22,000 SIBs in Viet Nam, representing 3% of total number of registered businesses in the country.[1] SIBs play a crucial role in providing support for vulnerable groups, mostly by creating jobs for them and delivering essential services. However, due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on Viet Nam's society and economy, the positive impacts SIBs can deliver to such vulnerable groups are being eroded. This, coupled with existing institutional and operational challenges to the development of the SIB sector, means even greater challenges facing SIBs, especially SIBs led by women and different vulnerable groups.
[1] CSIE and UNDP, 'Fostering the growth of the Social Impact Business Sector in Viet Nam', (2018). Available at: https://www.vn.undp.org/content/vietnam/en/home/library/SIB.html
Ultimate Outcome: Increased resilience to COVID-19 of vulnerable groups, including women and girls in Viet Nam, through support to SIBs and the supporting ecosystem.
Intermediate Outcome 1: Improved effectiveness of SIBs, especially those led by women, to address the social and gendered impacts of COVID-19 and help achieve the SDGs.
Intermediate Outcome 2: Strengthened gender-responsive, inclusive, and regulatory environment to support the resilience of SIBs, especially those led by women and vulnerable groups.
Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) component
The project will prioritize supporting SIBs and intermediaries led by women. In all capacity building activities, the project will ensure equal representation of women and integrate topics on specific needs of women. The project's knowledge outputs will include research reports, capacity building materials, videos, etc. and will address gender-responsive aspects, and will be published publicly so that the wider community of SIB ecosystem stakeholders and different vulnerable groups can also benefit from them. Besides, the project also aims to strengthen the SIB policy making capacity of the government, so the policies are gender-responsive, inclusive, and transparent. The project will collaborate closely with national and local authorities, intermediaries, focusing on women empowerment to ensure the voice and needs of women will be heard and reflected in policies supporting SIBs.
Social and Environmental Screening Procedure
Project Document
Activity Web Page
Project Tenders
Purchase Order Summary
Social and Environmental Sustainability
IMPLEMENTING PARTNER
Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
DELIVERY IN PREVIOUS YEARS
2021$69,709
2022$559,349
Full Project information
Group Viet NamGlobal
Media group Viet NamGlobal
one planet share: sustaining human progress
artificial intelligence and the rule law
About us Our team Legal framework Funding and delivery Our partners
Our focus Sustainable Development Goals
News centre Publications Projects Stories Blog
Careers Procurement Contact us


text:
What Is Anise Liqueur?
Christina Edwards
Anise liqueur is a type of alcoholic drink made or flavored with aniseed or star anise. Most of these types of liqueurs are clear with a strong black licorice taste. Many countries produce types of anise based liquors. These can be served a number of ways, including straight up and on ice. Anise liqueur may also be an ingredient in some drink recipes, including those that are lit afire.
These can be yellow or green in color, but they are usually clear. Anise liqueur often has a strong black licorice taste. Some manufacturers of these types of liqueurs may use some licorice as a flavoring or additive.
Anise or aniseed (Pimpinella anisum).
True anise liquor is typically made by distilling the various components of the anise, or aniseed, plant. This plant is native to some parts of the Mediterranean and Southeast Asia. The fruit of the star anise plant, an evergreen tree native to China, can also be used to make anise liqueur. It produces the same type of anise flavor, but it is generally less expensive.
Jagermeister has an anise flavor.
Many countries are known for traditional types of anise liqueurs. Sambuca is an Italian anise-flavored liqueur, for example, and ouzo is a Greek anise-flavored liqueur. Pastis is an anise liqueur that is a popular aperitif in France. This drink was created in the early 20th century, to replace absinthe, which was banned around the same time.
Absinthe, which is believed to be Swiss in origin, is an anise-based spirit with a high alcohol content. Traditional absinthe was also made with the leaves and flowers of wormwood, which were believed to cause hallucinations. Today, however, most countries have now lifted this ban, and the drink has once again become legal. The traditional way to drink absinthe involves placing a sugar cube on a slotted absinthe spoon placed over a glass with a small amount of absinthe in it. The drink is then sweetened and diluted by dripping ice cold water over the sugar cube and into the glass.
Absinthe is often flavored with anise extract.
Other types of anise liqueur are also diluted with ice cold water. Certain oils in anise liqueurs are only soluble in alcohol, not water. When the water mixes with the liqueur, these oils separate from the rest of the liquid, making it appear cloudy. This is known as the louche effect.
Some anise liqueurs have a high enough alcohol content to catch on fire. These are sometimes used in flaming drinks, such as the Flaming Lamborghini. To make this drink, a high-proof anise liqueur is set on fire and other liquors are poured into the mixture.
What Is Licorice Liqueur?
Is There a Difference between Anise and Fennel?
What Is Anise Candy?
What is Pimpinella?
What is Anisette?
What is Pastis?
What is Anise Extract?
By: dimcha
By: scis65
Anise liqueur contains no licorice, but has a strong black licorice flavor.
By: eyewave
Sambuca is an Italian liqueur flavored with anise.


text:
Selig Elected AIAA Associate F...
Selig Elected AIAA Associate Fellow
Susan Mumm, Aerospace Engineering at Illinois Media Specialist
Michael Selig
Prof. Michael Selig has been awarded the distinction of Associate Fellow in the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) for his outstanding work in the field of aerospace engineering and as a leader in aerospace engineering education.
Selig was presented with his Associate Fellow pin and certificate at the AIAA Associate Fellows Dinner on January 13, 2014, at the Gaylord National Harbor Hotel and Convention Center, National Harbor, Maryland, in conjunction with the AIAA 2014 SciTech Forum.
According to the AIAA, Associate Fellows must have accomplished or been in charge of important engineering or scientific work, or have done work of outstanding merit or have otherwise made outstanding contributions to the arts, sciences, or technology of aeronautics or astronautics.
Selig leads the UIUC Applied Aerodynamics Group and publishes widely in the areas of low-speed aerodynamics, low Reynolds number aerodynamics, airfoil design, wind energy, wind tunnel testing and real-time flight simulation, including aircraft icing upset simulation and modeling. His aerodynamics research and design expertise has been applied to unmanned aerial vehicles/systems, kilowatt thru multi-megawatt scale wind turbines, record breaking solar powered aircraft, appendage design and wing-sail design for the America's Cup, front and rear wing designs in motorsports (CART and Formula 1), and many other areas. His codes and methods for airfoil design and wind turbine blade design are used in both the aerospace and wind turbine industries. His airfoil designs and data are available in the open/online literature and used worldwide in the RC and UAV/UAS arenas.
He and his collaborators have published over 120 articles, books, and conference papers, and over 40 technical reports. Selig holds four patents and has one patent pending.
He teaches courses in Applied Aerodynamics, Aircraft Design, and Aircraft Flight Mechanics. His teaching honors include Engineering Council Award for Excellence in Advising (2010) and the UIUC List of Teachers Ranked Excellent by their Students (for AE 416 Applied Aerodynamics, 2005).
Research honors include the AIAA Co-Founder Award for the AIAA Design/Build/Fly Competition (2007), LSF Le Gray Award for "For Outstanding Service to Soaring" – for his continuing experiments in low Reynolds number airfoil designs (2005), American Wind Energy Association, Wind Energy Academic Award given in recognition of exceptional contributions to the advancement of wind energy technology (2002), NASA TGIR Award "Revolutionize Aviation" to Aircraft Icing Project Team (2001), Sigma Gamma Tau Aerospace Engineering National Honor Society (inducted 1999), UIUC Campus Research Board Award (1994), Department of Energy Summer Faculty Fellowship Award (1993).
Selig earned a B.S. in Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering from the University of Illinois (1984), a M.S.E. in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering from Princeton University (1988), and a Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering from Penn State (1992).
According to the AIAA website, "The individuals comprising this year's class of Associate Fellows represent outstanding achievement and leadership in the international aerospace community. Each can be very proud of their accomplishments, and their admittance to the rank," said AIAA President Mike Griffin. "Their creativity, ingenuity and relentless pursuit of excellence have ignited the spark of progress within our community, and each helps make our world better for all humanity."


text:
LIVE: US Election 2020 | Biden-Trump Election Results | The Damage Report
The Damage Report host John Iadarola is joined by Ana Kasparian, executive producer and host of The Young Turks, to kick off TYT's election day coverage.
As polls begin to open, voter suppression efforts are underway across the country. Philly DA Larry Krasner warns so-called "poll watchers" they will be locked up if they attempt to intimidate voters. On the last day of campaigning, Trump and his cronies try to convince everyone they're going to win. Trump has reportedly told advisors he fears legal prosecution if he fails to win reelection. Senior officials at Deutsche Bank have announced they intend to cut ties with Donald Trump after the election.
Follow The Damage Report on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheDamageReportTYT/
Read more here: https://www.motherjones.com/2020-elections/2020/11/fbi-reportedly-investigating-texas-trump-train-incident/
"The FBI is reportedly investigating a Saturday incident in which Trump supporters, many of whom were allegedly armed, used their vehicles to swarm a Biden-Harris campaign bus that was traveling on an interstate in Central Texas. As my colleague Ali Breland noted yesterday, neither Joe Biden nor Kamala Harris was on the bus traveling from San Antonio to Austin, but the startling episode prompted the campaign to cancel a scheduled event. CNN reported Sunday that according to a law enforcement source, the bureau is now looking into the matter.
The incident was one of several around the country this weekend to prompt accusations of harassment and intimidation, with pro-Trump motorists seen blocking traffic and shutting down bridges in support of the president on the final weekend before the election. "
Previous Hold On To Your Butts… Election Day Is Here
Next Was Trump Crying Before This Fox News Interview?!


text:
No Coast Best Coast
Find the best hiking in the Midwest and Mountain West
Mount Tom
Sibley State Park, Minnesota
Hikes ›
Minnesota ›
Sibley State Park ›
Trip Date: Sunday, May 28th, 2017
Last Updated: Monday, May 20th, 2019
By Ricky Holzer
Rating ★★★☆☆(3/5)
Overall Difficulty Moderate
Navigation Difficulty Easy
Distance 3.5 miles roundtrip
Terrain Hilly
Best Seasons Spring, Summer, Fall
Family Friendly Yes
Dog Friendly Yes
Accessible Yes
360 degree views from atop the observation tower
Dense, shady forest
Easy connections to other trails for a longer hike
Hike Summary
Sibley State Park is pretty much par for the course for a Minnesota State Park; it has lakes, forest, and a bit of prairie. Mount Tom is the highlight of this park, and as the highest point for 50 miles with an observation tower on top, you will have tremendous panoramic views. The forest canopy will keep you nice and cool on a hot summer days, and once you're done with the hike you can cool off in Lake Andrew. If you're visiting Sibley State Park, this hike is a must do.
This hike begins near the day use area by the beach. Follow the Lakeview Trail along the lakefront, looking for signs for the "Mount Tom Trail". The park simplified routefinding by placing maps at most trail intersections and numbering trails so you can find each trail on the map more easily -- the Mount Tom Trail is #3, see the official map link at the bottom of the page. You have two route options for this hike: turn left onto the Mount Tom Trail at the first intersection and do a lollipop loop, or continue on the Lakeview Trail for another 0.4 miles before turning left onto the second intersection with the Mount Tom Trail. I opted for the first choice since I didn't realize it would only add 0.1 miles to do a true loop.
Should you choose the first option and start down the Mount Tom Trail, take a right at the T intersection with the Oak Hills Trail to go through dense, hilly forest. Then, turn left onto the Mount Tom Trail at the next intersection and follow that to the final destination. If you choose the other option, just follow the Lakeview Trail until you see another sign for the Mount Tom Trail, then turn left. Remain on this trail until you reach Mount Tom.
The trail has a few hills that you ascend and descend, and at one point it seemed as if I was already at the tallest point since there were no taller trees around. You'll know you're getting close when the trail starts curving. Eventually you'll arrive in a parking lot with some pit toilets and see the paved trail and observation tower on top of Mount Tom pictured below.
The observation tower on top of Mount Tom
It's all uphill from the parking lot! Luckily it's short and only moderately steep. Your efforts will be rewarded at the top -- the photo below shows you a view from but one of the four sides of the observation tower.
One view from atop the Mount Tom observation tower.
After descending Mount Tom, cross the parking lot to find the trail heading back. On your way, you can take a few extra steps to ascend Little Mount Tom. Following Little Mount Tom, the trail intersects with a dirt road. Turn left, and look for the continuation of the trail on the right side. Be cautious and visible while on the road! If you aren't ready to start the return trip or think you have more stamina, you can instead turn right on the dirt road to see the most scenic and beautiful parts of the park that require you hike further, taking one of the two loop trails.
Further down the trail, you can also choose to take a very short side trail to the top of Badger Hill, which is also another great photo opportunity and a chance to rest for a bit. After Badger Hill, you will come to a trail intersection; turn right here. You will cross the main road, then end at the trail you started at. All in all, this was a pretty rewarding hike and a worthwhile way to spend an afternoon. Connect with me using the social media links below and share your adventures!
Dogs are allowed on leash. While this trail is a bit longer than most other family friendly hikes on this site, it should be doable for older kids. For families with younger children, drive to the parking lot at the base of Mount Tom instead and cut out 95% of the hiking involved. This trail is only available during the Spring, Summer, and Fall; during the winter the trail system changes routes significantly and trails are designated for cross country skiing only. In addition, the trail to Mount Tom from the nearby parking lot is technically closed during the winter (though I'm sure you could still climb to the top). Be on the lookout for stinging nettle, especially if you choose to hike any of the less-maintained trails in the park. We were extremely lucky that we didn't need to use bug spray at all on this trip, but it is a good idea to bring some just in case. Also check yourself for ticks after the hike -- I found two lurking on my pant leg.
Sibley State Park is about 2 hours from the Twin Cities near the town of New London. I highly recommend taking Minnesota Highway 55 -- it's a two lane highway with very little traffic (even over Memorial Day weekend). Once you get to Paynesville, take Minnesota Highway 23 towards Willmar, then turn right onto Minnesota Highway 9 to go through New London. Turn left on County Road 148 and continue straight when you come to the intersection with U.S. Highway 71. The ranger station will soon be on your right.
Google Maps Directions
Parking, Fees, and Facilities
Like all Minnesota State Parks and Recreation Areas, you must pay a vehicle entry fee of $7 per day or $35 for an annual pass (highly recommended if you frequently go to Minnesota State Parks). If you actually want to hike, park in the lot near the beach by the Lakeview Campground. If you want to cheat, you can drive up the road next to the ranger station to a parking lot at the bottom of Mount Tom.
Nearby Hikes
Mount Tom and Equestrian Loop
★★★★☆(4/5)
High Peak Trail Loop
Glacial Lakes State Park, Minnesota
Bjorkland Trail
Lake Maria State Park, Minnesota
Uncas Dunes
Sand Dunes State Forest, Minnesota
★★☆☆☆(2/5)
Official Map
NOAA Weather Forecast
© 2016-2021 No Coast Best Coast
Home Map Hikes Parks Blog About


text:
Dunstable, MA
Tully Farm
The calves at Tully Farms Dairy are an independent bunch. You won't see Charlie Tully and his crew at feeding time, since these little ladies feed themselves.
To be more precise, they're fed using an automatic calf feeder, and Charlie Tully will tell you it's a time-saver, as well as an improvement in terms of calf health. Instead of the usual calf hutches, Tully now relies on an open pen for about 25 calves at a time, and they quickly learn to use the automated feeder when they're hungry. The new method provides more consistent feedings and is proving to be key for raising the herd's next generation of healthy calves.
It's just the latest innovation at Tully Farm, winner of the 2019 Green Pasture Award and Massachusetts' Dairy Farm of the Year. The award is given every year to one outstanding dairy farm in each of the New England states, with winners evaluated on production records; herd, pasture, and crop management; environmental practices; contributions to agriculture and the local community; and overall excellence in dairying.
Tully Farm has been family owned since 1872, for six generations, starting with the purchase of the original farm on Hollis Street in Dunstable. After acquiring other local farms, the operation has grown to include land in Dunstable and Pepperell MA and nearby Hollis, NH. Today, Charles W. Tully, Jr., known as Charlie, works with his youngest son, Jacob, alongside Charlie's wife, Jennifer, and remaining children, Kristina, Erin and Steven.
Charlie had a deep respect for his father, Charles W., Sr., — "the hardest-working man I ever knew" — but he was mentored by his grandfather, George Tully. "He was a forward-thinker," he explains. His father worked the farm; his grandfather focused on the business side, planning for the future and laying the groundwork for its continued success well into the 21st century.
Charlie obviously inherited the forward thinking of his grandad. In 1999, a new milking parlor was added, and other improvements followed. Today, activity monitors are used on their teenage cows and the milking herd, not only helping with reproductive management, but also keeping cows healthy.
The current Tully Farm consists of approximately 400 acres of land and 250 Holsteins cows as well as beef cows. They ship milk to Cabot in nearby Vermont, but in 2017, with the help of Hornstra Farm in nearby Norwell, the Tully family also started processing and bottling some of their milk to sell directly to the public at their farm store. The farm uses vat pasteurization and glass bottles to produce high quality, fresh milk.
In addition to products from the farm, Tully Farms Dairy supports other local farms and businesses by selling those company's products in their farm store as well.
Charlie is grateful for the Green Pasture award. "It's a real honor. We work hard to keep the farm presentable to the public, with the milk, the retail operation and the rest, but this award shows that people in the industry recognize our efforts."
Photos Courtesy UMass Amherst Extension


text:
MyAnimeList.net
Hide AdsLoginSign Up
${ item.name } (${ item.payload.media_type })
Aired: ${ item.payload.aired }
Score: ${ item.payload.score }
Status: ${ item.payload.status }
(${ mediaTypeWithStartYear })
Published: ${ item.payload.published }
- ${ work }
Favorites: ${ item.payload.favorites }
${ item.payload.alternative_name }
Birthday: ${ item.payload.birthday }
(${ item.payload.japanese })
Anime titles: ${ item.payload.num_animes.toLocaleString() }
Favorites: ${item.payload.favorites.toLocaleString()}
Members: ${ item.payload.members }
Category: ${ item.payload.category }
Created by: ${ item.payload.created_by }
${ item.payload.authority }
Joined: ${ item.payload.joined }
${ item.payload.date }
${ item.payload.work_title} ${ item.name }
in ${ item.payload.category }
MangaCharactersPeopleCompanies
AllAnimeMangaCharactersPeopleCompaniesManga StoreNewsFeatured ArticlesForumClubsUsers
View all results for ${ keyword }
Anime Search
Fantasy Anime League
Manga Search
Manga Store
Interest Stacks
MAL×Japan
Episode Videos
Anime Trailers
MAL Supporter
Fate/stay night Movie: Unlimited Blade Works
What would you like to edit?
SynopsisBackgroundAlternative TitlesPictureAiring DatesProducersRelationsRatingDurationSource
* Your list is public by default.
Status: WatchingCompletedOn-HoldDroppedPlan to Watch
Eps Seen: / 1
Your Score: Select(10) Masterpiece(9) Great(8) Very Good(7) Good(6) Fine(5) Average(4) Bad(3) Very Bad(2) Horrible(1) Appalling
Add Detailed Info
Synonyms: Gekijouban Fate/Stay Night: Unlimited Blade Works, Fate/stay night Movie, Fate/stay night UBW
Japanese: 劇場版 Fate/stay night UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS
English: Fate/stay night: Unlimited Blade Works
German: Fate/stay night der Film: Unlimited Blade Works
Spanish: Fate stay night la Película: Unlimited Blade Works
French: Fate/stay night le Film: Unlimited Blade Works
Aired: Jan 23, 2010
Producers: Geneon Universal Entertainment, Frontier Works, TBS, KlockWorx, Notes, CREi
Licensors: Sentai Filmworks
Studios: Studio Deen
Source: Visual novel
Genres: ActionAction, FantasyFantasy, SupernaturalSupernatural
Duration: 1 hr. 45 min.
Rating: R - 17+ (violence & profanity)
Score: 7.381 (scored by 115525115,525 users)
1 indicates a weighted score.
Ranked: #21902
2 based on the top anime page. Please note that 'Not yet aired' and 'R18+' titles are excluded.
Popularity: #998
Members: 214,168
Favorites: 854
Characters & Staff
Fate/stay night Movie: Unlimit...
Ranked #2190Popularity #998Members 214,168
MovieStudio Deen
Add to List Select(10) Masterpiece(9) Great(8) Very Good(7) Good(6) Fine(5) Average(4) Bad(3) Very Bad(2) Horrible(1) Appalling
Episodes: /1
PV TBS Global Business version
In Fuyuki City, the Fifth Holy Grail War is about to commence a lengthy battle of blood, death, and misery. High school student Rin Toosaka has trained her entire life for this moment—to become a magus capable of being a Master in the war. Summoning her Servant known as Archer, Rin finally sets foot into the battle.
Discovering that one of her acquaintances, Shirou Emiya, is drawn into the war as well, Rin offers to form an alliance for the time being. And as the two of them grow closer, Rin begins to learn more about Shirou's fate and ideals. Nevertheless, her goal remains the same: to win the all-powerful relic that can fulfill the wishes of those who are victorious after the war—the Holy Grail.
[Written by MAL Rewrite]
No background information has been added to this title. Help improve our database by adding background information here.
Visit MALxJapan
MALxJapan -More than just anime-
Learn how to draw anime & manga from Japanese pros🎨
Join the official Paradox Live MAL Club & celebrate the anime! 🎤
How much of an otaku are you? Take the quiz!
Related Anime
Adaptation: Fate/stay night: Unlimited Blade Works
Alternative version: Fate/stay night, Fate/stay night: Unlimited Blade Works, Fate/stay night Movie: Heaven's Feel - I. Presage Flower
Prequel: Fate/Zero 2nd Season
Kawasumi, Ayako
Toosaka, Rin
Ueda, Kana
Suwabe, Junichi
Emiya, Shirou
Sugiyama, Noriaki
Seki, Tomokazu
Matou, Sakura
Shitaya, Noriko
Kotomine, Kirei
Nakata, Jouji
von Einzbern, Illyasviel
Kadowaki, Mai
Canna, Nobutoshi
Asakawa, Yuu
Takechi, Tsuneo
Yamaguchi, Yuuji
Director, Storyboard
Yamamoto, Hideyo
Yanagisawa, Tetsuya
Opening Theme
"Imitation" by Tainaka Sachi
Ending Theme
"Voice ~Tadori Tsuku Basho~" by Tainaka Sachi
Archaeon
Fate/Stay Night is one of those franchises that needs very little introduction. TYPE-MOON's hit visual novel from 2004 was adapted for anime in 2006, and while the original series was good for the most part, the show suffered due to an inherent problem with any visual novel adaptation.
Visual novels are a strange blending of anime, manga and games that, in a number of cases, allow the player a degree of choice over the events in the story (although there are some purely linear ones out there). The issue though, is that the same event may have several different outcomes that are dependent on the ... choices made within the game, and it's this aspect of many visual novels that causes the most problems when it comes to making an adaptation as the storyline for these types of games are generally lacking in certain areas. The first anime version of Fate/Stay Night, for example, didn't just follow the game's Saber arc but also included bits from the other two arcs as the plot was believed to be too weak to support a 26 episode TV series.
Unlimited Blade Works, the second story arc from the game, has now been adapted as an anime movie, and unlike the TV series it promised to be a more faithful reproduction. The major question though, is whether the franchise works better in this format.
Ostensibly, Unlimited Blade Works is an alternative retelling of the original story, with many of the fundamental plot points, characters and settings included. The major difference between the two though, lies in the aim of the plot. In the original Fate/Stay Night (or Saber Arc, whichever you fancy), the goal was to stop the creation of the Holy Grail and end the war once and for all, but Unlimited Blade Works only uses this as a peripheral concept, with the main story being about the relationship between Archer, Tohsaka Rin's noble phantasm, and Emiya Shirou.
The main problem with the storyline is simply that it becomes too caught up in itself. While the basic concepts are good, the plot is far too reliant on knowledge of the previous anime series or the game itself. There are far too many occasions where no explanation is given for an action or event, a factor which doesn't help viewers with little to no knowledge of the franchise. Granted there is some effort made at the beginning of the movie to bring the casual viewer up to speed, but this is nowhere near enough to support the weight of the actual story.
That said, fans of the franchise may find this entertaining viewing at the very least, however they may also find it lacking in certain areas, in particular where the characters are concerned as, again, Unlimited Blade Works relies too much on what has gone before.
The problem with the characters is one that is fairly typical when it comes to movies - a lack of development, however the fact that this is an alternative retelling of an existing tale only serves to make this more pronounced. Both Rin and Shirou are decent enough characters for the most part, but one has to question why Shinji receives almost no development at all (and I never actually thought I would ever use that sentence when talking about anime), especially as a number of events in the story occur because of him.
There seems to be a kind of blatant ignorance of every other character aside from Rin, Shirou and Archer in Unlimited Blade Works, which may be due to time constraints admittedly, but given the degree of overacting and the long, drawn out fight scenes, it should be asked if this is actually the case. In addition to this, Shirou's abilities seem to grow at an accelerated rate over the course of the movie, and while one may accept this as some innate ability, the lack of any back story where this is concerned makes it nothing more than a convenient addition to the plot.
Be that as it may, this movie is looks very good for the most part. Studio DEEN have done a great job with Unlimited Blade works, but given that the director and most of the crew worked on the TV series, one might expect them to improve on their previous work. The animation is of a very high standard, and is a far cry from that of the TV series. The characters move very well, especially during the numerous combat scenes, and while they may look the same as always, their respective designs have been sharpened up. The settings have also undergone a degree of sharpening up, and are now more vivid and detailed than in previous versions of the story.
That's not to say it's all good in the visuals department though. There are occasions during where the design logic simply doesn't make sense, Saber's evening gown being one of them. There are also occasions where the characters movements seem far more theatrical than is necessary, especially during several of the combat scenes.
Which, strangely enough, brings me neatly on to the acting. Unlimited Blade Works uses many of the cast from the original series, which is generally a good sign for any retelling. Unfortunately the seiyuu have worked on many other projects over the last four years so their familiarity with the characters is not as good as it once was, and this shows in the amount of over acting in the movie. It seems as though the actors and actresses have focused more on the popularity of the franchise than the need to get the role right, and because of this it sounds as though they're trying too hard. In addition to this whichever bright spark decided that using English in certain scenes would be a good idea should be flogged as it seems totally unnatural, especially as it makes the character look foolish.
As far as the music goes, the movie is well served with a selection of dramatic, classically themed pieces to enhance the numerous action scenes. The sound effects are also very well crafted and choreographed, although it should be pointed out that certain scenes can become overwhelming with the combination of speech, music and effects.
On the whole, Unlimited Blade Works isn't a bad movie, but it's a far cry from being great either. The simple fact is that it's entertaining in its own right, but there's little there to recommend it to those unfamiliar with the franchise. That said, one could fairly watch it and find it works to a degree as a story, but only if they could forgive the lack of detail in the story, and the fact that the plot has several areas that needed further investigation.
That said, everything about this film screams out that it is definitely one for fans of the franchise, and ultimately they'll be the judge of whether it's good or bad. The movie may have its flaws, but fans may find these are forgivable as the well choreographed action scenes may make up for a lot. It could be fair to say that this movie was made specifically for fans of the franchise in the first place, as the efforts to introduce newcomers to the series seem a bit slapdash.
One final point is that while the TV series needed to borrow from the other game arcs in order to fill out the story, Unlimited Blade Works is almost the exact opposite, and because of this one has to wonder if the franchise would work better as a 13 episode series rather than either of its current iterations. At the very least there would be more time for explanations and the actors would be able to relax into their roles.
Whatever the case may be, we shall have to wait for Heaven's Feel to find that out.
Reviewer's Rating: 7
What did you think of this review?
Nice 0
Love it 0
Confusing 0
Informative 0
Well-written 0
More reviews by Archaeon (211)
Blec
Who is this for? Why was this even attempted?! Who the hell thought cramming 30 hours of story into a 90 minute movie was a great idea?! This "movie" is a disaster! If you have never heard of fate, you will be lost in this incomprehensible mess. If you have seen fate stay night by DEEN, the first third of the movie is a boring recap, the twists in the second act will be rubbish to you and in the third act... you will have an embarrassingly hilarious final fight and instead of a CG dragon you will get a ... CG dolphin. If you have read the visual novel, you will probably hate it the most, especially when there is a superior adaptation by ufotable you should watch instead.
To sum this up (in case you don't want to read about me tearing this to shreds): this is a shiny pointless piece of crap that has no reason to exist exist other than to spoil twists in the novel and take 2 hours of your life. Unless you don't care at all about this franchise and just want to see flashy animation... stay away from this film.
Story: 1/10
Example of Real storytelling: Basis/premise, Story and Character building, character interaction, internal struggle meets external forces, twist, climax, resolution
This film: Basis, TWIST TWIST TWIST TWIST TWIST DOLPHIN (WTF?) DEUS EX MACHINA!
The pace is all over the place, sometimes you don't even know how characters got to places, nothing is explained, and there is no flow or consistency.
Characters: 1/10
90 minutes trying to cram 30 hours... Ya... there is probably not going to be much room for development, but even if you know the characters you will be disappointed. The protagonist is an idiot who makes wrong choice after wrong choice, Archer (one of the other main characters) is an indecisive whore that switches sides every two minutes, Saber is reduced to a damsel in distress, Rin doesn't do anything smart, in the third act an "goldy archer" takes out two swords and charges in melee mode like a moron, ect. I kid you not, there isn't even a real conversation until 45 minutes into the film.
Art/Animation: 8/10
Admittedly it looks really good. There is a particular amount of detail emphasized on the character models and it all looks great. However, considering that the remake has already bettered this movie in these regards belittles this complement.
Sound: 9/10
Really the best thing going for it. The soundtrack by Kenji Kawai is excellent, making the action feel more epic and exciting than it otherwise be.
Enjoyment: 1/10
DEEN's movie is the bone of my suffering,
Broken is my body, and boiled is my blood,
I have created over a thousand tears,
Unknown to Death, nor known to life,
Have withstood pain to find my sanity,
Yet those hands will never hold me,
So as I pray, Ufotable's Blade Works
More reviews by Blec (11)
Maurox
Oh, UBW, where should I start?
UBW was probably one of the most anticipated movies, and I can't blame people for that - the original route in the Visual Novel was outstanding, touching, at one time keeping you at the edge of your seat, at another causing you to cry about the pain of the characters, the results of their unfortunate choices, their small mistakes or simply outstanding sacrifices. The movie made me remember that story, made me want to live through it again.
Too bad it doesn't MAKE me live through it again.
IMO the obvious mistake the creators did, was forcing 20 hours of game-play into ... 1,5 hour movie - at the same time being forced to cut some portions of the story in order to squeeze it into the time frame. A 3 part OVA would've been much better, but they decided to make a single movie, and cut things out. Unfortunately, the thing they cut was - of all things - the plot.
I am not amused.
When I first watched the movie, I thought they were doing the same thing as FMA:Brotherhood did, cutting out portions that already were covered in the TV series, as to save some time for later action - It turned out that yes, they did indeed do something like that, except they didn't stop at the moment movie derived from the series. Through the first two thirds of the movie I felt like I was watching that "Previously on..." preview section, that reminds you what happened last week in an episode, and helping you to "get into the mood", to get better enjoyment out of an episode. Large chunks of story were cut out, the only things that were left, were the absolutely-essential-to-the-plot scenes, that push the story forward. There are two main problems with this:
First thing is, you can't have only plot-driving material in the movie, you need to join it together somehow. If you want to know what I mean, try launching any series, but watch only odd episodes (1,3,5,7...) - You'll somehow understand what the plot is about, but in the process you will lose the whole mood, the suspension of disbelief will be broken, because the story won't flow, it will be stitched together - If they really did not want to put in the portions in-between, they could've helped it if they worked around it. They didn't. And yes, watching an anime series with every second episode cut out will get you a pretty decent idea of what this movie is to the original VN route.
But there's another problem - If you throw out all your character development, you also lose any attachment the audience might feel towards those characters. This is especially important in movies dealing with sacrifices, helping others by losing something precious to you. I hope this won't spoil too much, but there's one death in this anime that particularly hit me - in the VN it was display of honor, sacrifice and chivalry, and it really made me sad that that person died in the process - Now what hit me is that in the movie... I felt nothing. Absolutely nothing. I didn't get to know this character, I didn't establish a connection with him/her, so even though I know this scene should be sad and touching - I can't help, but not give a crap. Things in this movie just... happen, but I couldn't help but feel detached.
And that's really a shame, because animation is superb. The fights are exciting, the visual effects are stunning, and the whole animation just feels so smooth and flowing - something I really lack in a lot of animes that have fights in them. It's really dynamic, but you can follow what's happening on screen, and made me jump in my chair a few times, visualizing I was blocking enemy strike :) That effect is something I saw in only a few series, and I personally think that this is how all fights should actually be done in animation. There might've been some inconsistencies, but it was nothing to make a drama out of - and if you look at the way they did the story, all other faults bleak in comparison.
Sounds are... good I guess. I think I heard the original music from VN a few times which is a plus of course, all of the original actors are here... I'm not a sound specialist, so I can't say much, but I have nothing to throw against sounds. I like them.
The movie actually gets A LOT better near the end, where - surprise, surprise - there isn't much plot to deal with, because for the most part it's just fights.
My opinion? Watching TV series is the least you REALLY should do before seeing this - otherwise you won't get half of the things, because they aren't explained, as well you probably won't really understand characters' motivations and personalities.
But in the end - I recommend to just go and read the VN, because there's just so much more to this story than what this movie presents. If I was to use this movie somehow, I'd cut out the fight scenes, remix them and input them into the VN as cut-scenes, and just remove everything else. All in all - considering the hype and my expectations - I am really disappointed by this movie.
More reviews by Maurox (2)
More stacks
Everything Fate Related Anime but in Release Order // PART I
by AdomaniaP
50 Entries · 20 Restacks
Type-Moon Anime 1
by Blu3Zz
Fate Series - Anime Guide
by Boazanian
Fate/stay night1 User
Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children1 User
.hack//G.U. Trilogy1 User
Mahou Shoujo Madoka★Magica1 User
Tales of Vesperia: The First Strike1 User
Code Geass: Hangyaku no Lelouch R2 Special Edition - Zero RequiemAutoRec
Devil May CryAutoRec
Fate/Grand Order: Himuro no Tenchi - 7-nin no Saikyou Ijin-henAutoRec
AutoRec
Fate/Grand Order: Moonlight/LostroomAutoRec
Break Blade Movie 2: Ketsubetsu no MichiAutoRec
Shakugan no Shana III (Final)AutoRec
Shakugan no Shana MovieAutoRec
Guilty Crown: Lost Christmas - An Episode of Port TownAutoRec
Fate/Grand OrderAutoRec
Carnival Phantasm EX SeasonAutoRec
Visual Novel 'Fate/stay Night' to get New Anime Adaptation
Today in the special premiere night event for the "Kara no Kyoukai: Fukan Fuukei 3D" movie (theater release July 12th), it was announced that ufotable will make a ne...read more
Jul 12, 2013 9:00 AM by symbv | Discuss (907 comments)
Sentai Filmworks Licenses Fate/stay night: Unlimited Blade Works
According to their official press release, Sentai Filmworks has licensed Fate/stay night: Unlimited Blade Works. Sentai will release the movie digitally and on DVD a...read more
Feb 16, 2012 10:24 AM by Florete | Discuss (23 comments)
Recent Forum Discussion
Do i need to watch it?
Jawad_Fullmetal - Sep 23, 2021 5 replies by Nepxnep »»
Poll: Fate/stay night: Unlimited Blade Works Episode 1 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )
Faust721 - Jan 23, 2010 536 replies by KinjiKido »»
how the f does...(spoilers)
kaena - Dec 3, 2011 17 replies by theangelsweep »»
UBW Rin's route, but not Rin's story (spoilers)
Haneken2086 - May 22, 2018 0 replies by Haneken2086 »»
Fate series "spin-offs"
GhostFetus - Apr 29, 2017 17 replies by Suzuka »»
Recent Featured Articles
Mobile Game Fate/Grand Order To Be Made Into A Theatrical Performance
Following a 2016 animated feature, mobile game Fate/Grand Order is set to be adapted into a live stage play in July of 2017.
by CriticalAndroid
Game Adaptation
6 Anime Remakes Way Better Than The Originals
Some reboots flop. Others rise up from the ashes of their predecessors. Here are 6 anime remakes that did so well, they became even better than the originals.
by Littoface
MoreTop Anime
1 Bleach: Sennen Kessen-hen
2 Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood
3 Steins;Gate
4 Gintama°
5 Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai: Ultra Romantic
MoreTop Airing Anime
1 Vinland Saga Season 2
2 One Piece
3 Bungou Stray Dogs 4th Season
4 Golden Kamuy 4th Season
5 Blue Lock
MoreMost Popular Characters
1 Lamperouge, Lelouch
2 Levi
3 Monkey D., Luffy
4 Lawliet, L
5 Roronoa, Zoro
About Press Room Support Advertising FAQ Terms Privacy Privacy Settings Do Not Sell My Personal Information Cookie Notice at Collection Sitemap
Tokyo Otaku Mode Honeyfeed Manga Store Otsukai
MyAnimeList.net is a property of MyAnimeList Co.,Ltd. ©2023 All Rights Reserved.


text:
Processing Assisted Telephony Requests
The process with which requests are delivered and serviced is as follows:
When TAPI receives an Assisted Telephony request, it checks for a request recipient, that is, an application currently registered to process that type of request. If there is a request recipient, the request is queued, and the highest-priority application that has registered for that request's service is sent a LINE_REQUEST message. The message notifies the request recipient that a new request has arrived, and it carries an indication of the request's mode.
If TAPI cannot find a currently running application to process such a request, it tries to launch an application that has been registered as capable of doing so. This registration information is recorded in the HandoffPriorities section of the registry. TAPI tries to launch applications in the order in which they are listed in the HandoffPriorities section. (See the following step.)
If no application is currently registered, TAPI examines the list of request-processing applications on the associated entry in the HandoffPriorities section. If the associated line is missing from the file, if there are no applications listed on it, or if none of the applications in the list can be launched, the request is rejected with the error TAPIERR_NOREQUESTRECIPIENT.
When a request recipient is launched (whether or not it has been launched by TAPI) it is its duty to call lineRegisterRequestRecipient during the startup process and register itself as a request recipient.
If one or more applications are listed in the entry, TAPI begins with the first listed application (highest priority), and attempts to launch it using the CreateProcess function. If the attempt to launch the application fails, TAPI attempts to launch the next application in the list. When any application launches successfully, TAPI simply queues the request and returns a success indication to the application even though the request hasn't yet been signaled to the request recipient.
Once the request recipient application is launched, it calls lineRegisterRequestRecipient, which causes a LINE_REQUEST message to be sent, signaling that the request is queued. If for some reason the launched application never registers, the request remains queued and remains in the queue indefinitely until an application registers for that type of request.
If TAPI finds such a registered application already running or successfully launches one, it queues the request, sending a LINE_REQUEST message to the server application, and returns a success indication for the function call to the Assisted Telephony application. This success message states only that the request has been accepted and queued, not that it has been successfully executed.
When the server application is ready to process a request, it calls the function lineGetRequest. This lets it receive any information it needs, such as an address to dial. It then processes the request, using the Telephony API functions (such as lineMakeCall and lineDrop) that would otherwise be used to place the call. Invoking lineGetRequest removes the request from TAPI, and the request parameters are copied in an application-allocated request buffer. The size and interpretation of the contents of the buffer depend on the request mode.
The server must ensure that it uses the correct parameters when executing requests. When doing so, these steps are followed:
The request recipient first receives a LINE_REQUEST message informing it that requests can exist for it in the request queue. This tells the application to call lineGetRequest and keep calling it until the queue is drained (if the request is for making a new call), or to drop an existing call. This message does not contain the parameters for the request, except in the case of a request to drop an existing call.
If the request is to make a new call, the Assisted Telephony server uses the lineGetRequest function to retrieve the full request, which includes the request's parameters. The server now has all the information it needs, such as the number to dial or the identification of the maker of the request. First, however, the server must allocate the memory needed to store this information.
Finally, the server executes the request by invoking the appropriate Telephony API function or set of functions.
If TAPI cannot launch an application capable of serving as a request recipient, the Assisted Telephony call fails and returns the error TAPIERR_NOREQUESTRECIPIENT.