Low Return On Investment

low return on investment
    low return
  • compound noun. Low return measured against stock market indexes
  • A thing that is worth buying because it may be profitable or useful in the future
  • investing: the act of investing; laying out money or capital in an enterprise with the expectation of profit
  • The action or process of investing money for profit or material result
  • outer layer or covering of an organ or part or organism
  • An act of devoting time, effort, or energy to a particular undertaking with the expectation of a worthwhile result
  • the commitment of something other than money (time, energy, or effort) to a project with the expectation of some worthwhile result; "this job calls for the investment of some hard thinking"; "he made an emotional investment in the work"
low return on investment - The Dhandho
The Dhandho Investor: The Low - Risk Value Method to High Returns
The Dhandho Investor: The Low - Risk Value Method to High Returns
A comprehensive value investing framework for the individual investor
In a straightforward and accessible manner, The Dhandho Investor lays out the powerful framework of value investing. Written with the intelligent individual investor in mind, this comprehensive guide distills the Dhandho capital allocation framework of the business savvy Patels from India and presents how they can be applied successfully to the stock market. The Dhandho method expands on the groundbreaking principles of value investing expounded by Benjamin Graham, Warren Buffett, and Charlie Munger. Readers will be introduced to important value investing concepts such as "Heads, I win! Tails, I don't lose that much!," "Few Bets, Big Bets, Infrequent Bets," Abhimanyu's dilemma, and a detailed treatise on using the Kelly Formula to invest in undervalued stocks. Using a light, entertaining style, Pabrai lays out the Dhandho framework in an easy-to-use format. Any investor who adopts the framework is bound to improve on results and soundly beat the markets and most professionals.

82% (8)
2 Park Avenue Building
2 Park Avenue Building
Park Avenue and 32nd Street, Manhattan The colorful and striking 2 Park Avenue Building, built in 1926-28 on lower Park Avenue, was designed by one of New York’s foremost architects of the first half of the twentieth century, Ely Jacques Kahn. Con­structed when this section of the avenue was just beginning to be developed with modern office towers, 2 Park Avenue represents one of Kahn’s finest essays into Art Deco or Mod­ernistic style architecture. The name Art Deco came from the famous show in Paris that in­troduced the style, the 1925 Exhibition des Arts Decoratifs. In the 2 Park Avenue Building, Kahn was able to successfully integrate a new decorative type produced by the application of colorful terra-cotta panels in geometric designs to a tall, commercially successful office/loft structure. 2 Park Avenue was one of the important late 1920s buildings that helped create the visually lively and iconic city of the early 20th century. Kahn’s career spanned most of the first half of the twentieth century, during which time he became known for his commercial structures. He is responsible for the design of numerous tall office and loft buildings in mid­town Manhattan (especially in the Garment District), as well as factories and several houses. He claimed that business owners were open-minded about the design of their buildings and he enjoyed the opportunities for innovation that he believed commercial work afforded. In his designs, Kahn attempted to reflect the newly available and con­stantly changing types of materials and technology, and was highly influenced by the new industrial design trends coming out of Europe in the 1920s. His traditional training at the Ecole des Beaux Arts served as the framework for his approach, which combined the traditional with the modern to create the dominate architectural vocabulary of the 1920s and 30s. The 2 Park Avenue Building is one of Kahn’s most dramatic and successful works and survives today as one of the most beautiful and dis­tinctive office towers of the Art Deco period. 2 Park Avenue Building The site at Park Avenue between 32nd and 33rd Streets was occupied by the dilapidated Park Avenue Hotel and had not been previously developed because there were unattractive transit car barns located directly across the street. In 1925 however, these were replaced by a large office tower designed by York & Sawyer. The ultimate use of the area was still uncertain, and the developers of 2 Park Avenue did not know whether they intended the building to be used for offices or manufacturing. They asked Kahn to design a building that could be adapted for use either as offices and showrooms, or for light manufacturing. Since it was built as a speculative investment, the owners wanted an appealing building to attract tenants, while giving them as large a return on their investment as possible. This type of speculative building coincided with the dominant forces of business and commercial enterprise in the 1920s, and the stylish Art Deco architecture was seen as giving expression to this power. Kahn was particularly adept at meeting the needs of commercial clients. He provided a fashionable building that would serve as its own advertisement and attract clients, while meeting the zoning requirements and fitting into the area where it was constructed. His buildings were fairly economical to construct, while still having large floor areas that could be adapted to changing business needs. In an article in which he wrote about the economic considerations entailed in designing commercially successful skyscrapers, Kahn explained how he determined that at 2 Park Avenue a mostly square block, filling all three streetfronts with a light court in the rear would provide the largest possible and most adaptable floor areas for his client and the variety of needs of the possible tenants in the building. Kahn’s success was partly due to his concern for the bottom line and he noted in his writing that economic considerations were as important to a building as the plan and layout. He explained that no matter the design of the exterior, bankers had to be convinced of the economic feasibility of a new building before it would be constructed. Kahn realized that the facade design was more a “question of clothing” because it all fits onto a steel skeleton.While Kahn was concerned about the economics of a building project, he was first and foremost an architect, and he was involved in the design issues of his day. Kahn’s response to the question of what was modern architecture was that it should “represent its own time” and solve “each practical modern problem in the most direct and honest way.” “Our aim should be to create, not so much a new form of design, but a decorative quality which can only be linked with the particular material involved.” Critic Lewis Mumford, writing in the journal Architecture in 1928 about modern design, pointed to 2 Park Avenue as one of the best examples. He
Day 25 of 365+54 (April 24, 2010) - Lisa at Fred Astaire Dance Fantasy 2010
Day 25 of 365+54 (April 24, 2010) - Lisa at Fred Astaire Dance Fantasy 2010
It’s amazing how good equipment in photography can make such a big difference in your pictures. I would venture to guess; you will see your return on investment most of the time in low light situations. Most cameras do fine when the light is perfect, but it’s when you start getting 50-100ft away where you wish you had the $2000 f2.8 200mm zoom verse the $600 70-300mm zoom. You also start to long for the new camera bodies that have amazing ISO and noise reduction features. My friend Lisa had a big dance show tonight and the gang went to cheer her on. At first I was thinking the light should be good since they are on stage with a spot light. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Stage lighting is all about mood and effect, not about taking pictures. The light appears to be bright only because the rest of the light is so dim or non-existent. I did do some homework before hand about how to shoot rock concerts. Figured that was close enough to this. I had my only fast lens out, Nikon 50mm f1.8, ready to go. Had my plan of what settings I might use, what ISO I was thinking would give me OK pictures without them being all grain. All prepared, I was in good shape. Wrong! The light was even dimmer than I expected and the seats were in the balcony, which took out the 50mm since I needed the zoom. (Balcony was actually better for watching the show, and might have been better if I had a Nikon 70-200 f2.8) So here I am with my Nikon 70-300mm f5.6. At first I try aperture priority mode and take a few shots. Oh man, all blurred. Then I kick up the ISO high enough to stop the blur. Nope, try again way too grainy. Finally I settle on manual mode, shutter at 125, f5.6, and ISO 1600. I figure I can try and run noise ninja on it after to get some of the gain out. The shots are looking pretty dark but they aren’t as grainy as ISO3200 and I’m not getting a ton of motion blur. It’s better than nothing. So, here is one of the shots from the night. What I’m curious about is how different would this have gone with a D3 and the 70-200 f2.8. Would it really be $6000 better? All the low light high ISO stuff on the Nikon site looks amazing, but then again, they could have spent hours in Photoshop fixing that up.

low return on investment
low return on investment
Return on Investment Analysis for the Almond Board of California
This is a NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA report procured by the Pentagon and made available for public release. It has been reproduced in the best form available to the Pentagon. It is not spiral-bound, but rather assembled with Velobinding in a soft, white linen cover. The Storming Media report number is A659424. The abstract provided by the Pentagon follows: The purpose of this project is to complete the first phase of a broader research project concerning the exploration of the relationship between consumer attitudes and usage for almonds. It aims to provide the scientific methodology for assessing the effect promotional expenditures have on influencing consumer attitudes as well as relating that to the final impact on the demand for almonds. This project was conducted with the sponsorship of the Almond Board of California (ABC), an organization supervised by the United States Department of Agriculture, responsible for promoting the consumption and increasing the market share of the California produced almonds in the domestic and international markets. The primary objective of the project is to develop a methodology that links research, public relations and advertising expenditures made by the ABC, to Attitude, Awareness and Usage (AAU) measurements and eventually to almond shipping and pricing data. The ABC is required by legislation, to conduct a return on investment (ROT) analysis every five years. In conducting this analysis, the organization is interested in developing a management tool that can indicate ROI, but can also be used to identify the portfolio of investments that will maximize AAU (attitudes, awareness, usage). This would allow the ABC to assess the relative impact of its investments portfolio (promotional expenditures) and use this information to make the necessary adjustments in order to improve its effectiveness.