There are a lot of people in this world who more often than not have small houses. Also for this reason small sized kitchens. However, the imaginations have no limits. What’s more a person having a small sized kitchen will also have never ending imaginations as how to make his/her kitchen look out of this world. Well this is an article in particular for those people who have very small kitchens. Now you do not need to worry if you have a very small or limited budget. There are still a number of ways as well as strategies by which you will be able to brighten up your yet small sized kitchen.
A lesser amount of space in the kitchens looks like to be in actual fact frustrating for its users. But you can all the time make possibilities. Just look at your kitchen for two minutes and make out what it is not there in it and what can one do to improve it. You would require changing your cabinets as well as counters. It gives the impression to be extremely expensive in reality, to change all the counters as well as cabinets. However you can do it the other way round as well. Buy simple and not very expensive cupboards of the size you want. Cupboards of every size as well as shape are easily available in any local departmental store. Paint the cupboards according to your taste and pep up your kitchen with them. Remember, color schemes matter a lot at the time of decorating a small sized kitchen. Use different colors for cabinets and different for the doors. This is thought to be a very new style and it will most certainly add to the beauty of your kitchen.
The financial statement can be shared between all the family members. You can use chalkboard paints which are very easy on the pockets. If you would like to personalize your kitchen make an effort with idea of writing messages on the walls or else the lower cabinets. One can make use of a lot of creativity as well as imagination at the time of designing the kitchen. Easy on the pocket plastic storage containers can be used as an alternative to cabinets. It will create a lot of spaciousness as well. The food will also remain fresh in these plastic storage containers. Only the daily used items should be placed in the kitchen. All the big sized cutlery items which are used only on special occasions should be placed in some other room as to avoid excessive rush in the kitchen. Now comes the floor remodeling. You can use tile stickers as an alternative to proper expensive tiles. These tile stickers can be easily glued to the floor and are available in a lot of colors. So you can redecorate your kitchen even in small budget and less spacing in kitchen. Just focus on your thoughts and then stick to them till the end of the project.
2010/05/13
Becoming Vegetarian
Vegetarianism is the practice of eating a plant-based diet of fruits, seeds, vegetables, nuts and beans. Vegetarians typically eat eggs, dairy products and other animal derivatives, while vegans steer completely clear of anything containing animal products. The commonality between the different levels of vegetarianism is that none eat the actual meat of an animal.
Beyond this common tie, however, there is perhaps surprising variation among the diets of those who consider themselves to be vegetarians. For example, lacto-vegetarians include milk in their diet, while ovo-vegetarians eat eggs, and lacto-ovos eat both. Pure vegans, meanwhile, do not use any products containing animal derivatives, which may even extend to the use of cosmetics and other products that were tested on animals. At the other end of the spectrum, semi-vegetarians exclude most meat from their diet, particularly meat from mammals, although they will eat poultry and fish. Raw vegetarianism allows only the consumption of uncooked nuts, fruits, seed or vegetables. Fruitarianism is a group of vegetarians who insist on eating only fruits, nuts, seeds and plant matter which can be retrieved without harming the plant itself. Vegetarianism includes many other levels and labels, too.
What it all comes down to is personal choice and commitment. People choose vegetarianism for a variety of reasons. For some, it is because of health concerns. For others, it might be religious. Then there are those who for ethical reasons revolving around ecology and animal rights choose a meatless diet. Of course, there are many other reasons why people choose to follow a vegetarian diet and lifestyle.
Despite what critics may say, vegetarianism can actually be a healthy diet. Before making the switch, one must know what they are doing in order to maintain healthy nutrition as a vegetarian. One of the key concerns among vegetarians is protein intake. Although most people get their protein primarily from meat, these sources can be replaced by soy, quinoa, and other foods. Leafy greens, tofu, and other foods are also important for meeting vitamin, iron, and calcium requirements and getting enough of other essential nutrients. Vitamin D is also a concern for vegetarianism. For those who do not drink milk, sun exposure is key. Just 15-30 minutes a day can help. There are also Vitamin D supplements. To be on the safe side, it is a wise idea for a someone who is dedicated to vegetarianism to take a daily multi-vitamin supplement, as well as an omega-3 supplement.
For those wanting to follow the road of vegetarianism, an in-depth study of the possible options and factors would be a smart idea. Vegetarianism is a way of life, a conscious decision, and a lifestyle commitment. Whatever your reasons for choosing vegetarianism, such a diet and lifestyle does have its benefits. Before making the switch, it is important to understand the health aspects of taking meat out of your diet. Many vegetarians also explore other aspects of the lifestyle, such as the use of vegan fashions and vegan-friendly products. If what you're learning about vegetarianism sounds appealing to you, it might be be the right move for you.
Beyond this common tie, however, there is perhaps surprising variation among the diets of those who consider themselves to be vegetarians. For example, lacto-vegetarians include milk in their diet, while ovo-vegetarians eat eggs, and lacto-ovos eat both. Pure vegans, meanwhile, do not use any products containing animal derivatives, which may even extend to the use of cosmetics and other products that were tested on animals. At the other end of the spectrum, semi-vegetarians exclude most meat from their diet, particularly meat from mammals, although they will eat poultry and fish. Raw vegetarianism allows only the consumption of uncooked nuts, fruits, seed or vegetables. Fruitarianism is a group of vegetarians who insist on eating only fruits, nuts, seeds and plant matter which can be retrieved without harming the plant itself. Vegetarianism includes many other levels and labels, too.
What it all comes down to is personal choice and commitment. People choose vegetarianism for a variety of reasons. For some, it is because of health concerns. For others, it might be religious. Then there are those who for ethical reasons revolving around ecology and animal rights choose a meatless diet. Of course, there are many other reasons why people choose to follow a vegetarian diet and lifestyle.
Despite what critics may say, vegetarianism can actually be a healthy diet. Before making the switch, one must know what they are doing in order to maintain healthy nutrition as a vegetarian. One of the key concerns among vegetarians is protein intake. Although most people get their protein primarily from meat, these sources can be replaced by soy, quinoa, and other foods. Leafy greens, tofu, and other foods are also important for meeting vitamin, iron, and calcium requirements and getting enough of other essential nutrients. Vitamin D is also a concern for vegetarianism. For those who do not drink milk, sun exposure is key. Just 15-30 minutes a day can help. There are also Vitamin D supplements. To be on the safe side, it is a wise idea for a someone who is dedicated to vegetarianism to take a daily multi-vitamin supplement, as well as an omega-3 supplement.
For those wanting to follow the road of vegetarianism, an in-depth study of the possible options and factors would be a smart idea. Vegetarianism is a way of life, a conscious decision, and a lifestyle commitment. Whatever your reasons for choosing vegetarianism, such a diet and lifestyle does have its benefits. Before making the switch, it is important to understand the health aspects of taking meat out of your diet. Many vegetarians also explore other aspects of the lifestyle, such as the use of vegan fashions and vegan-friendly products. If what you're learning about vegetarianism sounds appealing to you, it might be be the right move for you.
2009/12/28
Cash In On Your iPhone App
Who doesn't want to capitalize on the iPhone app gold rush? With close to 120,000 apps created and over two billion downloads so far, this is officially a multi-billion dollar industry. Apps like "Don't Push the Red Button" and iFart making the top spots in the App Store, it's not unreasonable to ask "How are these apps making money anyway?" At first glance, it certainly appears to be random, but there is a method behind the madness.
There are few but powerful models for making money from iPhone apps, but across the board success comes down to two things -- users and engagement. Before we look at these models in depth, there are some strategies that any app should apply to increase downloads and user-base.
First of all, those apps lucky enough to have an online user-base such as Facebook, Huffington Post, and Yelp are best served by leveraging their existing users. Facebook in particular does an excellent job of converting users by posting a news feed item whenever a current user first connects to the iPhone app - this has enabled the Facebook app to consistently remain on the top ten list of free apps . Secondly, developers with multiple iPhone apps can use one app to leverage the other. For instance, Flipside5 has a series of iPhone games that they cross-advertise on their family of apps, reaching an instant loyal user base for new apps. App networks like ngmoco's Plus+ and OpenFeint are increasingly popular and profitable for developers as they deeply incorporate social networking virality into iPhone applications that propel new downloads.
The main ingredient -- and conversely the most elusive -- is buzz. An app that will get buzz is hard to define, but you'll know it when you see it. Buzz worthy apps generally do one thing and they do it well. They take full advantage of iPhone functionality so that the app immediately makes you feel like you can't live without it and you can't wait to show it to your friends -- case in point: Shazam. If you're one of the ten people who haven't yet heard of it, Shazam allows you to hold your iPhone up to a song and, after 30 seconds, tells you the title and artist of the song that's playing (and let's you buy the song on iTunes, of course).
Shazam leads nicely into a new model for monetizing a free iPhone app: in-app purchases. Apple recently started allowing developers to make in-app purchases in free, as well as paid, apps. This allows developers to let users download their app for free and then pay to get extra features or levels. For instance, Rolando 2, relaunched as a free app, where users can play the first level for free, then have to pay to access higher levels. Monetization of this app is determined not simply by downloads, but by conversion rate of users to in-app purchases. The exploding virtual currency market in the social gaming space will surely drive many players like Zynga, Playfish, and Playdom to extend their online social gaming experiences to the iPhone app space and leveraging in app purchasing will be a perfect fit for those developers.
Another model for a free app is the ad-supported model. Ad-supported models enable developers to release completely free versions of their apps. These apps include a premium version with more features and no ads. Some developers such as Inedible Software of Shotgun Free, find that they make much more revenue off of their free version. For in-depth case studies of apps using this revenue model, download a Mobclix white paper. For this model, a great money making app would not only have lots of downloads, but longer session times and greater life time value of users who keep coming back to the app.
Finally, there are paid apps ranging anywhere in-between $.99 to $899.99. Paid applications overall get fewer downloads than free apps, but for many developers this is still a lucrative monetization model for their premium apps. An example of an app that has been very successful with this model is Flight Control, a game that sells for $.99, and is consistently in the top 50 list for games. The key is to release your app at the right price point and schedule price drops and updates as necessary to retain new downloads and keep the app at the top of your category.
App Store success will come to those developers who leverage these revenue models most effectively. When the App Store started, the only real option for developers was to produce apps that sold for one or two dollars. However, as developers worked to build apps with more functionality, more depth, and more utility, they needed additional ways to monetize to make it worth their time. Take CNN's new paid app for instance, they added advertising so there would be a steady stream of revenue to offset the high quality features their app offers. As iPhone apps move from a gold rush, where any random app can get lucky, to a market where only the best, high-quality apps rise to the top, rest assured new and combined monetization models will emerge and serious developers will be looking for serious ways to make positive returns on their investment...which in the end creates a more exciting environment for consumers!
There are few but powerful models for making money from iPhone apps, but across the board success comes down to two things -- users and engagement. Before we look at these models in depth, there are some strategies that any app should apply to increase downloads and user-base.
First of all, those apps lucky enough to have an online user-base such as Facebook, Huffington Post, and Yelp are best served by leveraging their existing users. Facebook in particular does an excellent job of converting users by posting a news feed item whenever a current user first connects to the iPhone app - this has enabled the Facebook app to consistently remain on the top ten list of free apps . Secondly, developers with multiple iPhone apps can use one app to leverage the other. For instance, Flipside5 has a series of iPhone games that they cross-advertise on their family of apps, reaching an instant loyal user base for new apps. App networks like ngmoco's Plus+ and OpenFeint are increasingly popular and profitable for developers as they deeply incorporate social networking virality into iPhone applications that propel new downloads.
The main ingredient -- and conversely the most elusive -- is buzz. An app that will get buzz is hard to define, but you'll know it when you see it. Buzz worthy apps generally do one thing and they do it well. They take full advantage of iPhone functionality so that the app immediately makes you feel like you can't live without it and you can't wait to show it to your friends -- case in point: Shazam. If you're one of the ten people who haven't yet heard of it, Shazam allows you to hold your iPhone up to a song and, after 30 seconds, tells you the title and artist of the song that's playing (and let's you buy the song on iTunes, of course).
Shazam leads nicely into a new model for monetizing a free iPhone app: in-app purchases. Apple recently started allowing developers to make in-app purchases in free, as well as paid, apps. This allows developers to let users download their app for free and then pay to get extra features or levels. For instance, Rolando 2, relaunched as a free app, where users can play the first level for free, then have to pay to access higher levels. Monetization of this app is determined not simply by downloads, but by conversion rate of users to in-app purchases. The exploding virtual currency market in the social gaming space will surely drive many players like Zynga, Playfish, and Playdom to extend their online social gaming experiences to the iPhone app space and leveraging in app purchasing will be a perfect fit for those developers.
Another model for a free app is the ad-supported model. Ad-supported models enable developers to release completely free versions of their apps. These apps include a premium version with more features and no ads. Some developers such as Inedible Software of Shotgun Free, find that they make much more revenue off of their free version. For in-depth case studies of apps using this revenue model, download a Mobclix white paper. For this model, a great money making app would not only have lots of downloads, but longer session times and greater life time value of users who keep coming back to the app.
Finally, there are paid apps ranging anywhere in-between $.99 to $899.99. Paid applications overall get fewer downloads than free apps, but for many developers this is still a lucrative monetization model for their premium apps. An example of an app that has been very successful with this model is Flight Control, a game that sells for $.99, and is consistently in the top 50 list for games. The key is to release your app at the right price point and schedule price drops and updates as necessary to retain new downloads and keep the app at the top of your category.
App Store success will come to those developers who leverage these revenue models most effectively. When the App Store started, the only real option for developers was to produce apps that sold for one or two dollars. However, as developers worked to build apps with more functionality, more depth, and more utility, they needed additional ways to monetize to make it worth their time. Take CNN's new paid app for instance, they added advertising so there would be a steady stream of revenue to offset the high quality features their app offers. As iPhone apps move from a gold rush, where any random app can get lucky, to a market where only the best, high-quality apps rise to the top, rest assured new and combined monetization models will emerge and serious developers will be looking for serious ways to make positive returns on their investment...which in the end creates a more exciting environment for consumers!
Financial boards face a strategic game of risk
And grapple more effectively in the next decade: namely the management, not only of risk generally, but also with regard to strategic transactions.
Sir David Walker in his recent review of corporate governance spoke of the "possibility of the heady mix of enthusiasm for the mooted transaction on the part of the CEO and the investment banking adviser". He recognised at the same time that the investment banking advice would typically be provided on the basis of a contingency fee, payable only if the transaction is completed.
In such circumstances it becomes the responsibility of all the directors, and particularly the non-executives, to make sure that proceeding with the transaction is in the long-term strategic interests of the company and its shareholders and then that the execution of the transaction is "conducted with the appropriate degree of detachment and independence from the advocacy on the part of the CEO".
How is this achievable in practice, recognising that a non-executive director is by definition and in practice never going to be as involved or operating with the same level of knowledge as the executive team?
In one sense this is an advantage. He or she may be better able to see the "wood from the trees" and, as a result, identify the less obvious pitfalls. But, even though those who achieve appointments as non-executive directors on the boards of listed companies are unlikely to be "shrinking violets", in many circumstances it may still require some considerable confidence
and courage for the non-executive member of the board to air their reservations about the merits of the transaction itself or the way in which it is being executed in the face of an enthusiastic and potentially unsympathetic majority.
Clearly in any strategically important transaction one would expect a non-executive director to have complete access to all relevant information and similarly to the company's advisers whether financial, investment or legal. The director will need
to be alive to the possibility that the provider of that external advice may themselves have an interest in the successful outcome of the transaction.
It is for this reason that Sir David recommends that, where banks are concerned and strategic transactions involve an acquisition or disposal, as a matter of good practice when advising the full board, the risk committee of that board should ensure that a due diligence appraisal of the proposition be undertaken drawing where appropriate on independent and external advice.
Delegating this advisory role to a risk committee does have the advantage of giving the potential "Jonahs" strength in numbers, quite possibly reinforced by the benefit of external and independent advice, and, where all that has happened, the risk of an imprudent and inappropriate deal is more likely to be avoided.
But ultimately each individual member of the board is accountable for any decision of the full board. Some fear that delegation of risk to a sub-committee might wrongly encourage others on the board inadvertently to drop their guard believing that delegation alleviates them of the full burden of that responsibility.
In the final analysis therefore, it is all about the way in which the collection of individuals, who are the board, as talented and experienced as they may individually be, reach a collective decision. You can have all the rules, regulation and best practice you like and compliance with the same, but they will not necessarily achieve the optimum outcome.
Harnessing the skills and experience of that group for the greater benefit of the organisation is as much about the management of individual behaviours and group dynamics as about compliance with the law and statements of good practice. Walker says as much. "Governance practices are by their nature organic, dynamic and behavioural rather than akin to black-letter regulation."
He now looks to the chairman to engender an environment which encourages challenge, avoiding the phenomena of "group think" or "passive free-riding", facilitating interaction and promoting openness in board members. Nothing new one might think, but seemingly deficient in the well-publicised cases of some financial institutions.
Sir David Walker in his recent review of corporate governance spoke of the "possibility of the heady mix of enthusiasm for the mooted transaction on the part of the CEO and the investment banking adviser". He recognised at the same time that the investment banking advice would typically be provided on the basis of a contingency fee, payable only if the transaction is completed.
In such circumstances it becomes the responsibility of all the directors, and particularly the non-executives, to make sure that proceeding with the transaction is in the long-term strategic interests of the company and its shareholders and then that the execution of the transaction is "conducted with the appropriate degree of detachment and independence from the advocacy on the part of the CEO".
How is this achievable in practice, recognising that a non-executive director is by definition and in practice never going to be as involved or operating with the same level of knowledge as the executive team?
In one sense this is an advantage. He or she may be better able to see the "wood from the trees" and, as a result, identify the less obvious pitfalls. But, even though those who achieve appointments as non-executive directors on the boards of listed companies are unlikely to be "shrinking violets", in many circumstances it may still require some considerable confidence
and courage for the non-executive member of the board to air their reservations about the merits of the transaction itself or the way in which it is being executed in the face of an enthusiastic and potentially unsympathetic majority.
Clearly in any strategically important transaction one would expect a non-executive director to have complete access to all relevant information and similarly to the company's advisers whether financial, investment or legal. The director will need
to be alive to the possibility that the provider of that external advice may themselves have an interest in the successful outcome of the transaction.
It is for this reason that Sir David recommends that, where banks are concerned and strategic transactions involve an acquisition or disposal, as a matter of good practice when advising the full board, the risk committee of that board should ensure that a due diligence appraisal of the proposition be undertaken drawing where appropriate on independent and external advice.
Delegating this advisory role to a risk committee does have the advantage of giving the potential "Jonahs" strength in numbers, quite possibly reinforced by the benefit of external and independent advice, and, where all that has happened, the risk of an imprudent and inappropriate deal is more likely to be avoided.
But ultimately each individual member of the board is accountable for any decision of the full board. Some fear that delegation of risk to a sub-committee might wrongly encourage others on the board inadvertently to drop their guard believing that delegation alleviates them of the full burden of that responsibility.
In the final analysis therefore, it is all about the way in which the collection of individuals, who are the board, as talented and experienced as they may individually be, reach a collective decision. You can have all the rules, regulation and best practice you like and compliance with the same, but they will not necessarily achieve the optimum outcome.
Harnessing the skills and experience of that group for the greater benefit of the organisation is as much about the management of individual behaviours and group dynamics as about compliance with the law and statements of good practice. Walker says as much. "Governance practices are by their nature organic, dynamic and behavioural rather than akin to black-letter regulation."
He now looks to the chairman to engender an environment which encourages challenge, avoiding the phenomena of "group think" or "passive free-riding", facilitating interaction and promoting openness in board members. Nothing new one might think, but seemingly deficient in the well-publicised cases of some financial institutions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)