All of us want to be financially secure and yet few actually achieve that goal. Why is that? Even when a person has a stroke of good luck, say, by winning the lottery or if they are fortunate enough to be good at a sport, or at singing, in order to capitalise on that talent, there are many examples of those same people becoming poor once again after their sporting or musical career is over. They were not able to hang on to their wealth while they had it. Why?

Conversely, there are also self-made millionaires who have lost everything they had, but have recovered their previous position of wealth within a few years. How is that possible?

A book which I am currently reading by T. Harv Eker (Secrets of the Millionaire Mind; ISBN 978-0-7499-2789-9) puts forward a very interesting theory: it is because most of us have had our minds already set for us by our early influences; by our childhood memories. If, for example, your parents were always struggling with money, the chances are that you will follow the same pattern – unless you are able to identify what it is that is preventing you from reaching your potential. The subconscious thoughts that are set from a young age also mean that even if you do study hard, take courses, none of this will make any difference to your situation unless your 'blueprint' is set correctly. Eker refers to this as the 'financial thermostat'; those who are millionaires, billionaires even, have their 'thermostat' set to high so that even if they do lose everything, their mindset is such that they are mentally able to bring themselves back up to their former state. If your 'thermostat' is set to a lower setting, then even if you are in a position to earn a good income, you are likely to still find yourself barely getting by. 

These 'thermostats', according to Eker, come from what we're told from an early age. If for example, your parents drilled into your head that "money is the root of all evil", for example, of course that will affect your attitude in later life. How financially secure you become is entirely dependent on how your mind is set, and the vast majority of people are totally unaware that they are thinking in such a way that they are harming their own financial futures.

It is important, therefore, that you are able to reset your mind in order to eliminate the subconscious blocks to your own success. If you're new to starting your own business, or if you've been in business for some time and recognise yourself as one who is always living from month-to-month, then this is something you need to be thinking about.

I will be returning to this subject in future blogs; meanwhile I would recommend you obtain a copy of Eker's book and help yourself to reset your own mind to one that is geared for financial success!

Image: Salvatore Vuono / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Technorati Tags: financial blueprint, financial freedom, financial security, financial thermostat, linkedin, self improvement

Something which cropped up in a Skype conversation I had recently with a fellow marketer got me thinking; we were talking about how we conquered our fears of doing something different, moving out of that comfort zone of familiarity.  The quote '20 seconds of bravery' was her way of dealing with that fear of the unknown, in other words just be brave for that short period of time and go ahead; make that call, knock on that door, whatever it is you were concerned about, be brave for just those 20 seconds it takes.

The quote is actually from the movie "We Bought A Zoo" (based on the memoirs of a British journalist who really did buy a zoo in Devon, England) and the exact words of the lead character (played by Matt Damon) were:

"Sometimes all you need is just 20 seconds of insane courage – literally, just 20 seconds of embarrassing bravery."

How many times have you stopped yourself from going out and doing something different, perhaps through fear of the uncertainty? People in full-time employment, for instance, who may be considering striking out on their own and doing something new but are held back because of the possible insecurity that would come with leaving a steady job. The thing which most people overlook is that their steady job may not always be there – what if your firm is taken over, or if you already work for a large firm, what if your department is outsourced? The latter happened to me several years ago and the lingering uncertainty which surrounded the office from that point on was worse than the fear of the unknown which comes with doing your own thing, because as an employee who was transferred across from one company to another, you have no control over your destiny. It is decided by unseen executives, those who only see employees as figures on a spreadsheet. 

With the explosion in opportunities for ordinary people to earn a good living using the Internet, there are many ways in which you can take charge of your own life, your future and the security of your family.  All you need to take that first step is that "20 seconds of embarrassing bravery" in order to get over your own fears.  There are many people who have done just that and are enjoying the freedom that comes with taking charge of their own destinies, rather than have it determined for them by faceless executives.

If you're feeling brave for 20 seconds, that is all you need to click this link or fill in the details to the right for more information on how you can Map Your Life!

See you on the other side?

Technorati Tags: 20 Seconds of Courage, affiliate marketing, Benjamin Mee, building relationships, business, business consulting, Cameron Crowe, Carla Gallo, Colin Ford, Dartmoor Zoo, Elle Fanning, internet marketing, JB Smoove, John Michael Higgins, Jonsi, lead generation, linkedin, Maggie Elizabeth Jones, marketing, Matt Damon, networking, Patrick Fugit, Scarlett Johansson, self improvement, sigur ros, small business marketing, Thomas Haden Church, We Bought a Zoo

That whooshing sound I just heard was my intended blog post being overtaken by events.  The intention was to write a short article about the Instagram mobile photo-sharing app which has just been released on Android, and my thoughts on it now that I've had a chance to get used to it.  However the news which broke tonight that Instagram itself has been acquired by Facebook, in a deal worth an eye-watering $1billion, has meant a hasty rewrite.

This is the second such high-profile acquisition by a large player in the social media environment, following from last month's purchase of the blogging platform Posterous by Twitter. However on this occasion, both sides are emphasising that they intend to keep Instagram alive, with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg saying in his statement that it is " an important part of the (Instagram) experience" that Instagram connects to "other services beyond Facebook". The Facebook CEO assured users that existing Instagram features such as the ability to post to other networks and maintain a separate list of followers to Facebook will remain. For Instagram's part, their chief executive Kevin Systrom also stressed in a blog post that Instagram would not be going away.

Cynics may well point to previous Facebook acquisitions and remind people what happened to FriendFeed, HotPotato and most recently, Gowalla (all closed shortly after being acquired) but, with Zuckerberg stating explicitly that he intends to build on the existing strengths of Instagram (30 million users, even before the app was released to Android), it is to be hoped he will be as good as his word.  Whether the existing userbase will all be pleased about the acquisition is another matter; there are those who wanted to move away from Facebook's dominance of the social media sphere. Instagram was poised to become a major rival to Facebook, especially as it had made the jump to Android and was no longer the playground for only the iPhone crowd.

So, notwithstanding the fact that Instagram is now a part of the Facebook juggernaut, I may as well go ahead and press on with my original plan to offer my own thoughts on the app itself.  It was the social media aspect of Instagram which drew me into downloading it for my Android as soon as it became available; there are already apps with similar filtering capability out there for Android which do as good, if not a better job. Up to now I've been using Urbian's Retro Camera; that works slightly differently in that the filter you get depends on the 'camera' you select (you're offered one of six 'retro cameras', each with different characteristics) but, it gives pleasing results if you are after that retro feel to your digital snaps. You can also upload to Facebook or Twitter from that app, so you need not worry about being unable to share your retro masterpiece with your friends.

The first thing that I noticed the first time I downloaded Instagram was the size of the app; it took up around 13MB of my phone's internal storage. If your Android device doesn't offer you a great deal of internal storage, that's a major consideration. However, subsequent updates (I've updated mine three times already and I haven't had the app for one week yet, at the time of writing!) have given the user the ability to move the app to the SD card, which I have done. Using the camera is pretty straightforward, the middle icon on the bottom row puts you into the camera and you just tap that icon once again to take your picture. Once you've taken the shot, it puts you into the filtering stage.  However, you can also select from a previously taken picture by tapping the icon to the right of the 'shutter release' when in camera mode, and apply filters to that.

From there, you are offered a selection of filter effects, which wash out the colour, change the contrast, apply 'glare' and many other effects you'll be familiar with. These are selected from a row along the bottom of your screen and are applied as soon as you select one. You do have other options along the top of the screen also: you can apply a 'frame' to your image, rotate it (90 degrees at a time) or apply a 'boost' button which appears to lighten darker areas of the photo without burning out already bright areas. Once you are happy with your choices, the arrow button in the top right will 'process' the image and take you to the upload screen, where you can add your caption, geotag the image if you wish, and decide which other social networks to share the image to. (Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare and Tumblr are supported).

After uploading, you will see the image on your own 'timeline'. This looks a lot like Twitter (or Twitpic, more accurately) and hashtags are used in a similar fashion. The 'home' icon, on the bottom left will put you to the main timeline where you can see the latest pictures from users you follow. A nice touch which I liked was the double-tap on the image itself, in order to 'like' it. (You get a little heart symbol appear momentarily on the image, and another underneath which turns red to show you 'like' it.) From there it is similar in operation to Facebook's timeline, with comments appearing below the image.

All very nice, and it does work well, but I found the whole experience to be pretty standard; other than the fact it can be viewed only on mobile devices (unless you use a third-party site to view Instagram images) there's nothing particularly groundbreaking about this platform. I don't find it particularly addictive, although I've posted a few – admittedly trivial – images up there, it's not something I would see myself spending a lot of time doing. Clearly, a lot of people disagree with me though, given the hostile reactions first to the Android launch, now the Facebook acquisition, by Instagram fans.

With that in mind then, why would Facebook stump up so much for this platform? The consensus seems to be that they wanted to nip in the bud a possible rival, with the web and social media becoming more and more about the mobile device, Instagram was well placed to become the go-to social network with 30 million users and counting. Those sort of numbers cannot be ignored, even by the number one social media network, and although the Instagram platform hadn't been monetized at the time of acquisition, it's a safe bet that Facebook will accelerate that process.

Only time will tell whether this move was a wise one by Facebook or whether it could be another case of a major player paying far too much for a currently trendy platform, but for the sake of those Instagram users, I hope it is the former.

Technorati Tags: android, instagram, instagram acquisition, instagram android, instagram deal, instagram facebook acquisition, instagram facebook deal, instagram hipsters, instagram iphone, instagram tweets, instagram twitter, instagram twitter storm, kevin systrom, linkedin, mark zuckerberg, social media

Instagram, the photo-sharing app which was previously only available on iPhone, has just been launched for Android. Within hours a deluge of tweets, some joking, some serious, appeared decrying that the app is no longer exclusive to iPhone users and that Android users should stay away. Some even imply that Android is only for a lower class of user.

However silly this appears to be, the fact is some iPhone owners really do feel they have had their noses pushed out of joint. (Most, it should be said, are not in the least bit worried who else uses the app and on what platform they choose in which to do so.) Having recently downloaded the app for myself I am investigating its social media aspect; for fun picture-taking and filtering there are plenty of apps already out there which do the job just as well, from Retro Camera for Android to the online pixlr-o-matic, either will give your crisp digital image the look of a 40-year old faded snapshot, if that is what you are after.

To illustrate the point as to just how silly things have got, here are a selection of social media posts which went up since the app went live on Android. Already a Twitter account has been established purely to retweet such postings; I've linked it here but be warned, some of the content is 'parental advisory'!

A further blog post on Instagram for Android will be posted soon.

Instagram on Android

The photo app Instagram was ported over to Android on 3 April. Some existing iPhone users have not reacted well to this and have tweeted some bizarre comments about the fact it’s no longer exclusive to iOS…

Storified by Ronnie Soo · Wed, Apr 04 2012 18:07:42

Technorati Tags: android, instagram, iphone, linkedin, photo sharing apps, social media

A few things have happened in the world of Pinterest since my earlier blog on the subject; the lady who questioned their terms (a photographer and lawyer called Kirsten Kowalski) was contacted by Pinterest founder Ben Silbermann after she posted her original blog, declaring that the terms as they stood meant she would have to delete her boards on the site to avoid a possible copyright infringement suit.

Since that blog went viral Pinterest have been working to change their terms and conditions; as far as I see the copyright infringement thing still holds (i.e., you're liable if you infringe and the content creator decides to sue), but there is one change to the site's etiquette guidelines that is significant. Pinterest no longer discourage users from pinning their own work to boards. This had to happen, because the only really safe way to avoid a possible infringement is to pin your own pictures up. Of course, if you DO have permission, that's fine, but it is vital to verify this first.

Some sites are now providing a 'Pin It' button so that Pinterest users can pin their pictures up on their boards, and that's fine so long as the pictures are the property of the site.  With this change in their guidelines, I have now taken the plunge and actually signed up for Pinterest myself. I understand their terms and conditions are changing this month and it remains to be seen if they will make their rules clearer on what can and cannot be pinned safely, but now that there is no longer the 'stigma' of pinning your own photos up (it was regarded as self-promotion), I feel it is now the right time to get involved – and I have every intention of promoting myself!

So far my pinned pictures have been general snaps, just to get things going, but from the online marketing standpoint, this is something that must be embraced. Consequently I will be learning all I can about how to get the best out of this tool and anything I learn, I will share here.

Meanwhile, you can find my boards here – watch this space!

Technorati Tags: internet marketing, lead generation, linkedin, marketing, traffic generation

The dictionary definition of a contrarian is simply this: one who expresses a contradicting viewpoint , especially one who denounces the majority persuasion. Going along with the majority is not always the right thing to do; the majority of people once believed that the Earth was flat and those who theorised otherwise were considered mad. Only when science proved it beyond doubt did it become accepted that the Earth was indeed a sphere, those who thought that to be the case against popular opinion were contrarians.

Being a contrarian doesn't mean taking an opposing viewpoint for the sake of it; it means taking the viewpoint opposing the majority because you sincerely believe it to be the right one. Contrarians can exist in many walks of life, and one such contrarian who is well-known in the financial world is Warren Buffett. Buffett has become successful and wealthy by practising his beliefs, namely that the time to invest in a particular stock is when the price has been beaten down owing to the market's shortsightedness. A famous saying of Buffett is that one should “buy winter coats in the summer”; that is, buy something you will need in the future when the price is lower and there is little demand for it.

A good example of contrarian thinking today is in the world of finance. Most people are totally unaware of the way finance works and are saving in the wrong things. If you're putting your savings into a bank account, the interest that you will earn is such that when the time does come for you to retire, what you invested will not be worth very much at all. A contrarian would look at other ways to invest, tangible assets that do not depreciate. Investing in currency is what most are doing, but when you consider that banks in the US and worldwide have been printing more money in recent years (quantitative easing, as it is known), that money cannot be worth as much when more of it is in circulation. The financial crisis is not yet over, and in fact the signs are collapse is imminent. While it is still 'summer', one should be buying their 'winter coats' now and investing in things other than a fiat currency. Few people are even thinking about this, yet are working long hours and finding their bills increasing year on year, and having less and less to set aside for savings. Those that do save, are saving in the wrong things. Only the few who do understand that things cannot continue as they are with banks printing money to try and get out of debt, will be in a position to live comfortably in their later years.

To conclude: rather than think the exact same way as everyone else you know, your friends, family, co-workers, why not think the way the few do, the ones who are successful? Your friends and co-workers are unlikely to be rich, indeed they may be struggling to make ends meet as you may be yourself. To change that situation, you need to change your whole mindset.

I would like to invite you to view the short video linked here and to take the first step towards changing your mindset, changing the way you think about money and starting yourself on the road to financial freedom. Please click the link and fill in your details at the end for more information.

I'll see you on the inside!

Technorati Tags: contrarian, contrarian investor, fiat currency, fiat currency forecast, fiat currency structure failure, fiat currency vs gold, financial collapse, financial crisis, imminent financial collapse, linkedin, quantitative easing

This week a high-ranking executive at Goldman Sachs resigned via an open letter, published in the New York Times. Greg Smith, a former executive director who was based in the UK, made some explosive allegations against the investment bank, chief of which was that under the current leadership, the culture within the organisation had changed from one where doing the right thing by its clients was uppermost, to one where the pursuit of profit came before everything else.

Smith goes on to allege that internal e-mails sent by managing directors of the bank refer to their own clients as “muppets”; he alleges that the firm's clients are being steered into investments that are geared more towards maximising profit for Goldman Sachs, rather than towards products which would be of most benefit to the client. The most damning statement he makes is that the working environment at the organisation is now the most “toxic and destructive” it has been in all the years he has been working there.

The point Smith makes, that a successful business can only sustain itself so long as it is trusted by its clients, is one that applies to any business, large or small, but one which he maintains has been forgotten by the senior management at Goldman Sachs in the relentless pursuit of profit.

Goldman Sachs has defended their position, saying that they disagreed with Smith's view of the firm and that they were the views of a “disgruntled” and relatively junior executive. In Smith's letter, he mentions that he won a bronze medal at a table tennis tournament in his youth, citing that as one of the things he was proudest of and that he achieved it through hard work, not shortcuts. This has provided a convenient diversion for those defending the institution, as has the allegation by Smith that clients were called “muppets”. While Smith is being criticised for those things, the real points he makes are being shunted to one side.

Anyone who has seen the documentary “The Conspiracy Against Your Money” may well be unsurprised at the revelations made by Greg Smith; his resignation has echoes of one made by another former investment banker, who, in the documentary, said that he was so disgusted by the practices of the institution he had worked for that he could no longer work there in all good conscience, and resigned. Following that, he made it his mission to inform and educate ordinary people, who are not part of the financial industry and perhaps feel that it has nothing to do with them, just how the financial crises of recent years affect each and every one of us and what we can all do to prepare for an economic collapse.

The documentary, made just as the crisis of 2008 had apparently died down, makes it plain that a bigger and worse collapse is imminent and gives the viewer the stark choice: be educated financially when the worst comes, or be uneducated along with the majority of people who will be the ones to suffer the most. It is essential viewing and once seen, you will begin to understand why it is that so many of us seem to be working longer hours for less and less money, while prices for essentials spiral.

Please click here to go to The Conspiracy Against Your Money website.

Technorati Tags: business, conspiracy against your money, gary cohn, goldman resignation, goldman sachs, goldman sachs culture, goldman sachs pr disaster, greg smith, linkedin, lloyd c blankfein, wall street

There have been a number of news reports recently, mostly emanating from the United States, that employers are demanding that prospective employees provide their passwords so that their Facebook accounts can be scrutinised.  This is in clear breach of Facebook's own policy on rights and responsibilities, and there have been many complaints to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) over the practice. 

Some employers have attempted to get around the restriction by instead demanding that jobseekers sign into their account in the presence of the interview and allow themselves to be 'shoulder-surfed'; that is allow their profile to be examined by the person who they may be working for. This practice has also been condemned by the ACLU, as the practice is possibly in violation of state laws concerning an individual's privacy.

Facebook's privacy settings allow a user to lock down his or her profile quite tightly, so that they can choose who sees their posts by group or on an individual basis. The development that an employer considers it acceptable to demand access to an individual's profile so that it can be scrutinised for any comment or photo that the employer does not approve of, is alarming to say the least.  Opponents of this practice argue that it is no different from an employer demanding access to an individual's email or even their diary, yet there seems to be a growing number of employers who are doing this. 

Separately, US colleges are now requiring some of their students who participate in college sports to add their coach as a 'friend' so that they can be monitored for compliance. There are even companies such as UDiligence, who offer tools to allow the accounts to be monitored for 'inappropriate' posts; although this tool must be added by the account holder it is easy to see that it will be a mandatory requirement if the student wishes to participate in the college sports programme. 

The whole issue raises a number of questions; uppermost in my mind is this one: is it because the job market is currently so competitive that employers feel that they can make such demands? That is to say, if one person refuses to divulge his or her password so the account can be scrutinised by a third party, the employer does not care because there will always be a candidate who will say yes, since jobs are so scarce. 

Another question which I certainly would be asking of the interviewer is this: would it be OK if I were to take a photo of them during the interview and tweet it for all to see? I know what the answer would be to that, but why should it be any different for the candidate? I fear the answer is that the employers feel that because they have something people want (i.e. the job) they can make any sort of demand on their candidates and the one that is prepared to divluge their own private profile is the one they hire.  With the job market as competitive as it is, do employers feel that they 'own' every aspect of their employees' lives? If you work for an organisation, how comfortable would you feel about your employer feeling entitled to pry into your life. If the practice of prying into a person's social media profile becomes acceptable, can employers then track your phone, bug your car or home in order to ensure that you are not doing, or saying anything about which they do not approve? Not that I'm suggesting companies WOULD go to such lengths to keep an eye on those who work for them, but the idea that they CAN, is chilling enough. 

This is a worrying trend and one I hope does not spread to other countries, I would like to think that privacy laws in the United Kingdom would disallow similar practices by HR departments here, but the growing trend among US students to create an account under an assumed name, leaving only  a 'fan page' under their real name suggests that laws in the United States certainly need to be tightened to put a stop to this practice. 

The answers to the problem of employers demanding access to your online life (and your life itself, by definition) are either to delete all your social media accounts and switch your computer off for good, or if you do want to use the Internet to improve your life as so many have before, then the answer is to work for yourself – and that's a whole different subject! 

Technorati Tags: employer policy, employment, facebook, hr policy, job seeking, linkedin, password access, shoulder surfing, social media, udiligence

Technorati Tags: blogging, blogs, linkedin

Technorati Tags: blogging, blogs, linkedin, posterous, posterous acquisition, twitter