Five Year Financial Highlights 2 Notice 4 Directors Report 12 Report On Corporate Go: Fill & Download for Free

If anyone doubts Russia is benefiting from the Trump presidency, they just haven’t thought about it enough. Russia benefits from the Trump presidency in any number of ways—at least 20 by my count.They would also unquestionably benefit even more if the hubbub caused by their interference with the American presidential election on Trump’s behalf hadn’t cast such a spotlight on the issue, which has produced continuing revelations about their connections to high level Trump staffers, basically every few days for the entire Trump presidency.Before getting into how Russia benefits, it’s important that we’re all aware of two established facts:The 17 agencies of the U.S. Intelligence Community unanimously concluded with high confidence that Russia ran a significant operation to interfere with the U.S. presidential election.The FBI Director recently confirmed under oath that Donald Trump and his campaign/administration are under active FBI investigation for colluding with Russia in this plot to affect the election.Without further ado, here are 20 ways Russia benefits from the Trump presidency so far, and how they may in the future:A President of the United States they can more easily manipulate. This seems like a logical place to start. Mikhail Fishman, the editor-in-chief of the Moscow Times, a paper critical of Putin (which has been attacked more than once), explained the Kremlin thinks of Trump as “a stupid, unstrategic politician.”“Putin is so much more experienced than Trump. He has more than 15 years of global political experience. He knows how to do things, how to work the system. He makes plenty of mistakes, but he knows how to think and act. Trump is a total neophyte. He has no experience and doesn't understand how global politics operates. He displays his ignorance every single day.”[We don’t have the space for all the examples of that ignorance so I’ll just mention that during the campaign, Trump wasn’t even aware that Russia had already invaded Crimea. See: George Stephanopoulos awkwardly corrects Donald Trump when he says Putin 'is not going into Ukraine' or Trump says Putin is 'not going to go into Ukraine,' despite Crimea or Trump tries to clean up on Crimea]“Trump is a posturing performer, full of idiotic narcissism. He appears to be a disorganized fool, to be honest. Putin, on the other hand, is calculating, organized, and he plans everything.”These quotes came from an interview published in this article: What does Russia want from the Trump administration? A Russian journalist tries to explain. As the writer summarized, “Fishman’s point is clear enough: Putin sees in Trump an opportunity to manipulate US-Russia relations.”No further response to their attack upon the United States of America. Let’s not be confused by the language being used, Russia’s cyber attack on American elections means Russia attacked America. The Obama administration put together some sanctions just before leaving office, but do you think it should end there? If another country attacked America, would Trump let it go and deny it even happened? He’s notorious for criticizing anyone and everyone, including our closest allies, and he likes to call himself a “counter-puncher.” Is it likely he would’ve been satisfied by the Obama administration’s actions if it were any other country that attacked us?The Trump administration has basically dropped the matter. The only reason it ever gets discussed comes from outside the administration, from Congress and the press. The administration has not taken a single proactive step on the topic or shown any interest in reacting to the attack. Attacking America without any reaction from the new administration obviously benefits Russia.No response—not even condemnation—to their more recent attack on the United States. Wikileaks just dumped a huge trove of supposed CIA documents purportedly detailing all of their cyber-war capabilities. George W. Bush’s CIA and NSA director, Michael Hayden, agrees with what many have been saying for some time now, that Wikileaks is acting as an arm of Russia. Any other administration would, at minimum, condemn the release, and quite possibly respond in kind, now that it’s become increasingly clear it’s Russia behind it. Still, not a single critical word or action from the administration.Appointment of inexperienced Putin friend to lead the State Department. Rex Tillerson, long time friend and oil partner of Putin, opposed US sanctions on Russia and is possibly the best they could’ve hoped for—a Secretary of State with no particular education or experience in diplomacy or international relations apart from a career at the helm of an oil company, forging partnerships with Russia and other corrupt governments. If you are Russia, what kind of SecState would you want? One with a pre-existing unusually friendly relationship with you, a history of opposing sanctions against you, and no education, experience, or expertise in government or foreign relations to speak of. They got their man. Even if Tillerson doesn’t do a thing to help Russia, that would be preferable to almost any other SecState they’ve faced or could expect to face as lack of action against their aggression on multiple fronts is a big win.Purging of the State Department’s most experienced people on Russia. One of the biggest American thorns in Russia’s side and checks on Russian aggression has been the State Department. This is who gets international cooperation in using America’s unparalleled “soft power” to build up alliances, block some of their hostile activities, and levy sanctions. Unlike Russia, the leaders of the US change frequently, so we are especially reliant on the expertise and institutional memory of our apolitical career civil servants at State. Along with the intelligence community, they’re the ones most likely to spot unseen Russian moves, understand hidden motives, and properly advise our top leaders so they can be effective, basically to prevent America from getting rolled by its counter-parts in Russia. We need this kind of expertise now more than ever with Russia’s years long crescendo of aggressive behavior reaching alarming heights, particularly since America’s new President, most of his White House staff, and Secretary of State, are all completely new to international relations.That’s why it’s pretty bad for America and beneficial to Russia when the Trump administration gets rid of our longest serving non-political employee at the State Department. And the second longest serving one. And the third… It’s actually a lot more than three highly experienced people, they’ve let a slew of them go. I’m not talking about “Obama people” but senior career professionals from the Foreign Service who have served under the past four, five, or in some cases, six presidents. Each person has decades of experience not easily replicated or replaced so there’s collectively centuries of experience walking out the door. That’s certainly not good for the USA, but it does benefit Russia when there’s a bunch of empty desks and newbies instead.[Given all that’s happening (or not happening) at State, it’s slightly less shocking that they went an unprecedented six and a half weeks without the “daily” press conference, or similarly that the new Secretary didn’t let the press corps join him on his first international trip, “breaking with decades of past practice.” Trump’s State Department Discovers That Press Briefings Aren’t Deadly]Slashing of the State Department’s budget. The initial Trump administration proposal would cut the State Dept budget by 37%. That kind of cut to the US’s envoys to the world and expertise at home would be devastating to our ability to project soft power abroad. A big cut in the U.S. State Department is good for Russia as it gives the U.S. fewer resources to push back on them with. You can’t slash their budget by 37% and think there wouldn’t be an effect. Most likely the cuts won’t be anything close to that (indeed, they’ve now revised it down to a still unthinkable 29%), at least not at first, but this is what the administration is pushing for. Even the military, who is getting a big budget boost, said this was an insanely bad idea.Not one word of criticism from the President of the United States. The U.S. is supposed to stand for freedom and speak out against tyranny and oppression. Throughout the campaign and administration Donald Trump has had very harsh words to say about congressmen, senators, judges, journalists, corporations, allies—basically everyone there is…except Vladimir Putin. It’s a deafening and noticeable silence from such a boisterous and pugnacious man, which speaks volumes. The U.S. has the loudest voice on the world stage and it seems clear it will no longer be using it to stand up to Russian misdeeds.Shortly before leaving office President Obama said of Putin, “This is somebody, the former head of the KGB, who is responsible for crushing democracy in Russia, muzzling the press, throwing political dissidents in jail, countering American efforts to expand freedom at every turn; is currently making decisions that’s leading to a slaughter in Syria.”When might we hear something like that from Trump? If the leader of the world’s most powerful country won’t stand up to Russia, who will? Trump is weak on Russia, and that is to their benefit.Not one word of criticism from the Secretary of State of the United States. In 2011, when Hillary Clinton was SecState, she said that Russia’s recent parliamentary elections were not free and fair (which the evidence shows they clearly were not). There were protests in Russia after the elections and Putin publicly blamed Clinton for it. Not having her in office means he no longer has to deal with someone unafraid to call him out on his dictatorial actions. We will see if the new Secreatry, Rex Tillerson, or his boss, Donald Trump, ever come close to being as critical of Putin’s tyranny as Hillary Clinton already has. So far we haven’t seen it. This is good for Russia (not the people, of course, but the current regime).Pro-Russia position in the Republican Party Platform regarding their invasion of Ukraine. At the RNC convention last summer when they were drawing up the party platform as they do before every election, they found that they had a freer hand than ever before. Unlike Romney and McCain who had their people moderate the platform so the hardliners of the party couldn’t go too far, Trump was completely hands off and let them do whatever they wanted with the platform—except when it came to its position on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. On that one issue, they got involved and had it softened (which they’ve been caught lying about repeatedly) to avoid any kind of pledge to give weapons to Ukraine. The watered-down language instead said the U.S. would provide “appropriate assistance.” Music to Russia’s ears.No real Russia policy is dangerous and may encourage major escalation in violence in Ukraine, the Baltics (NATO members), or even against the U.S. They’ve invaded neighbors, shot down airliners, bombed Syrian civilians and rebels backed by the US, cyber attacked America to influence our elections, likely published CIA secrets, defied an arms control treaty, harassed our diplomats, buzzed our ships—what’s next?They have elections of their own coming up in a couple years and that often means a ratcheting up of aggression. We need to get ahead of that. “In light of the dangers that the present Russian regime represents, however, what matters is deterrence, which always has a strong psychological element. Restraining the behavior of the Putin regime requires creating the impression in both word and deed that violations will meet with a serious response.” -National Review: Trump and Russia“The resignation of Michael Flynn, President Trump’s national security advisor, and the attendant stories about chaos and dysfunction in the White House, have highlighted the importance of personality and process in national security policymaking. But more important is the actual content of foreign policy — and it’s here that the Trump administration seems to be most seriously lacking. Unintentionally or not, the White House still appears to have no firm policy on the greatest threats facing the United States. In order of their priority they are: 1) Russia’s challenge to democracy in America and abroad…” -Foreign Policy magazine, Trump Needs a Russia Policy, or Putin Will Force One on Him”Supporting Russian propaganda: calling America’s election system rigged. One way to keep a corrupt dictator in power is to convince the people that there’s no such thing as a truly free and democratic government, that it’s all just as much a sham as theirs. Undermining western democracy and getting our own leaders to “confirm” that our system is rigged like theirs, plays right into their propaganda at home. When Russians accuse Putin of rigging elections, he couldn’t ask for a better set of ammunition than Trump has provided him.Putin wants to keep the Russian people cynically docile, overwhelmed by feelings of apathetic futility. Russians do protest and Russians do vote and Russians do try to speak out, but Putin jails and kills many that do, shuts down critical news outlets, rigs their elections, embezzles and allows his friends to as well, etc — getting the Russian people to believe there’s no such thing as a free country (so why even try?) makes it far easier to discourage opposition and keep his hold on power. Trump’s “rigged” narrative has been extremely beneficial to Putin in that regard.Supporting Russian propaganda: The President of the United States saying we’re just as bad as Putin when it comes to murder. When asked by Fox News Host Bill O’Reilly if Trump understood just how bad Putin is, calling him “a killer,” Trump said, “What, you think our country’s so innocent?” An unbelievable thing to hear from the President of the United States. [In March alone the lives of two Putin foes came to a violent end: the lawyer for a Russian whistleblower was thrown off the roof of his Moscow apartment and an outspoken former member of Russian parliament was gunned down in the street. See also: 10 critics of Vladimir Putin who wound up dead ]Fully unpacking Trump’s comment is beyond the scope of this post, but just as his “rigged” narrative is a lovely gift to Putin’s propaganda efforts, dismissing Putin’s actions as no worse than anything the U.S. does is a big, sloppy, wet, open-mouthed kiss for Putin.Masha Gessen, a journalist who has lived both here in the U.S. and in Russia under Putin, wrote a book on Putin’s rise to power. In a New York Times piece she explained that Trump’s response to that question is actually a technique straight out of the dictator’s handbook, an old Soviet technique called “whataboutism,’ the trick of turning any argument against the opponent.” Gessen explains how Putin and allies have renewed the use of it since coming to power, “They seem convinced that the entire world is driven solely by greed and hunger for power, and only the Western democracies continue to insist, hypocritically, that their politics are based on values and principles.”If it isn’t obvious that Trump’s statement was extraordinary, consider that “no American politician in living memory has advanced the idea that the entire world, including the United States, was rotten to the core,” Gessen noted. Vladimir Putin probably sent Donald Trump flowers and a singing telgram after that interview.Reduced American credibility. Of course having a president who says our government is just as bad as Russia’s is not good for American credibility but consider how many wildly untrue statements Donald Trump has made, even after taking office. Hell, pick just about any week of his presidency and he made one or more outrageous statements that were just incredible—as in not credible, unbelievable, and ultimately debunked. Put aside the idiotic assertions about the crowd size at his inauguration and other unimportant topics, he actually accused both the preceding American president, and our closest ally, of breaking laws to wiretap him. Both charges were baseless and rejected by all parties as utterly false, but now what happens when there’s a crisis and he needs some credibility to get something important to national security done? Will anyone believe him? How much more convincing and proof will be needed to get allies or others from the international community on board with America’s goals and plan of action? This terrible degradation of the American president’s credibility only benefits adversaries like Russia and China.Removal of sanctions. This has not happened yet—it’s only been two months and obviously there’s a lot of heat on them right now—but they’ve already admitted it was “under consideration” in the first week of the administration.When Mikhail Fishman, the Russian newspaper editor quoted above (#1) was asked why Putin feared a Clinton presidency more than Trump’s, Fishman answered “Because he knew that would mean an extension of Obama's harsh orientation to Russia, perhaps even more aggressive than Obama. Putin has experienced some difficult years since his 2014 invasion of Crimea, but he didn't expect this level of isolation.” (source: A Russian newspaper editor explains how Putin made Trump his puppet)Combined with falling oil prices, the sanctions have been painful to Russia’s economy; their GDP is down 3.7% and their currency is about a third less valuable than it used to be (see: Russia's GDP falls 3.7% as sanctions and low oil price take effect and Prolonged Sanctions Rip Into Russian Economy, Causing Angst For Putin).Lifting the sanctions is a major objective for Russia, Secretary Tillerson opposed the sanctions in the first place (certainly all his old friends and associates at Exxon want them lifted), and the Trump administration was already publicly floating the possibility of lifting them in their first week.Russia certainly thinks it’s a distinct possibility. “We don’t exclude the lifting of the sanctions after Trump enters office,” said a senior Kremlin official at the top of their information warfare food chain (we’ll get into that later).If there wasn’t an insane amount of Russia related heat on them right now—their National Security Advisor already had to resign and the administration is being questioned by the press every day and actively investigated by Congress and the FBI—it might’ve already happened.Trump’s new Secretary of Commerce is quite close with Putin associates. Secretary Wilbur Ross has major dealings with Russian oligarch and Putin friend, Viktor Vekselberg, as his business partner for the past two years. Much hay was made of a relatively small donation Vekselberg had made to the Clinton foundation, but this is an actual close relationship and billion dollar business partnership, so it ought to be much more concerning.Wilbur Ross has also served on the board of a bank with a former KGB official close to Putin, a bank saved by Russian money. We don’t yet know how this will benefit Russia, but it’s not the least bit hard to imagine how it might. What if career professionals in the American government recommend imposing more sanctions on Russia in retaliation for their attacks on us, perhaps targeting Russian financial institutions and oligarchs? Do you think this member of Trump’s cabinet might hesitate or argue against actions that harm his friends and business partners? We don’t know yet, and from the outside we may never have the full picture, but having a sympathetic senior member of the administration is obviously to Russia’s benefit.Weakening NATO, one of Russia’s greatest objectives, is clearly happening. NATO is the most important and successful military alliance since World War II. It helped keep the Soviets in check and it’s helping keep the Russians in check. Its strength is completely dependent on the confidence its members and adversaries have in the certainty that an attack on any member will be defended by all members, particularly its strongest member. Mr. Trump has undermined the NATO alliance at multiple junctures. Not only has Trump called it obsolete, questioned its validity, criticized its members, snubbed our allies, etc — but now the administration is truly weakening it with more than just portentous statements and symbolic snubs (refusing to shake the German chancellor’s hand) but serious actions.SecState Rex Tillerson is skipping the annual meeting of all the foreign ministers (his counterparts) of the 28 NATO member countries. This is the meeting where the policy and strategy to counter Russian aggression is discussed at the highest levels. It sets the strategy for the coming year. It’s always important but quite a bit more important when there’s a new president and doubly so when that president has made numerous alarming statements that cast doubt on whether the US would live up to its commitments. It’s far more than a diplomatic snub, it’s confirmation that the administration cannot be counted on, and it’s a signal to Russia that the U.S. might not step in if they attacked a NATO member. It’s hard to adequately characterize the magnitude of the situation.By the way, what’s Tillerson doing instead? He’s meeting with Russia. That seems a little like standing up your wife on your anniversary to go see your alleged mistress instead…except, ya know, with potentially billions of lives at stake. I haven’t really done the issue justice, I strongly recommend you read this article: Why experts think Rex Tillerson skipping a NATO summit is "an unmitigated disaster" I wanted to quote half and paraphrase the other half, but it’s better if you just read it.As ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff put it, “We’ve already sent a terrible message to NATO. The only message frankly that has gotten through of this administration to NATO is not that we support you, not that we value you, not that we thank our NATO allies for coming to our assistance in Afghanistan and Iraq where NATO soldiers have stood by, fought by and died with our own troops, but rather pay up. That’s the only message we’ve delivered.”About Tillerson skipping the NATO meeting to meet with Russia, Schiff added, “I hope the reason he’s going to Moscow is to hand back the Special Order Friendship medal he got from Putin because after what the Russians have done to us over the course of the last year, that’s the only reason Tillerson ought to be going to Russia.” Aside from the damage to NATO, it’s hard not to wonder what other benefits Putin might be getting from his meeting with Tillerson.[Following some backlash, Trump has announced he will meet with NATO allies in May instead. Some damage is already done but time will tell what actually happens from here. It’s been an eventful couple months and who knows what lies ahead…]Europe moving closer to Russia and more distant from America. When America elects a leader who can’t be counted on, Europe hedges its bets and gets closer to Russia. This clearly hurts us and is to Russia’s benefit. There are far right candidates and political parties in Europe that see Trump has both an inspiration and compadre, as well as an excuse to establish stronger ties with Russia.Some favor lifting European sanctions on Russia, which weakens America’s hand when trying to disincentivize further aggression, since those sanctions were punishment for previous aggression. The less likely Putin is to be hurt by future aggression (such as invading Latvia—a NATO ally we’ve pledged to defend), the more willing he will be to take the risk and put the world on the brink of war. How did WWI start? It started when one country’s heir to the throne was assassinated by a terrorist group (supposedly funded by Russia, as it happens) and triggered a chain reaction of war declarations on both sides based on a web of entangling alliances. NATO is a 28 country all-for-one-and-one-for-all defensive pact that Putin might just want to test now that it’s approaching its nadir. He’s already invaded multiple other neighbors that used to be under Russian dominance and he’s also already staged troops at the Latvian border not long ago. The threat is serious.[Some articles about “little Trumps” and would-be leaders in Europe wanting to move closer to Russia: Trump: The View From Europe, French Election Hints at a European Shift Toward Russia, Why France's Marine Le Pen Is Doubling Down on Russia Support, In France, ‘Independence’ Means Closer to Russia (WSJ pay wall), Citizens for Europe, Populismus und die Folgen: Die Donald Trumps sind überall - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Wirtschaft]Who does it benefit for Europe to have a widening rift with America? Who would benefit from Europe seeking closer ties with Russia? That’s right, it’s Comrade Putin!Weakening the EU. Trump has made many anti-EU comments, gleeful about Brexit and predicting/encouraging others to do the same. He and his chief strategy advisor, Steve Bannon, think the world (or at least the US) is better off with no multilateral cornerstone alliances like NATO or EU. They prefer only bilateral agreements. Sometimes they’ve walked back these kinds of statements, only to repeat them or make similar ones later, sending at best mixed messages. Trump has even explicitly said that he considers our relationship and level of trust with EU/NATO countries no different than the Russia relationship.As the Washington Post helpfully explains, this “president is the first American leader since World War II not to support European integration. The European Union has long been considered to be in the U.S. interest, since it created a unified market for U.S. businesses, provided a bulwark against communism during the Cold War and helped quell the bloody slaughter that cost U.S. lives, among others, in the first half of the 20th century. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, the European Union expanded eastward into formerly communist nations, a development that leaders there say helped bring rule of law and stability as they modernized their economies.” European leaders shocked as Trump slams NATO and E.U., raising fears of transatlantic splitIf you’re Putin, would you prefer opposition by unified adversaries or something less? Cracks in US-Europe solidarity and weakening of the European Union are the stuff of Putin’s dreams.Pride at Home and Respect Internationally. A top Russian military officer and Kremlin advisor spoke at a Russian convention early last year, well before the US election or any hacking was exposed, and openly said that they now have capabilities that will allow them to deal with the U.S. on equal terms, hinting at something big on the horizon. He said that we’re not in 2016 (it was when he said it), we’re in 1948, the year before Russia revealed it too had an atomic bomb to rival the U.S. as equally powerful. The translation was literally that in 1949 “everything changed and they started talking to us on an equal footing.”If it wasn’t clear enough, he went ahead and spelled it out as much as he could, short of mentioning a date, time, and target, “I’m warning you: We are at the verge of having ‘something’ in the information arena, which will allow us to talk to the Americans as equals.” The cyber advisor made it clear that once Russia “becomes strong, it will dictate to the Western partners [the United States and its allies] from the position of power.” Russia’s radical new strategy for information warfareThey are now putting a much larger fraction of their military efforts into information warfare. In fact, quite ominously, he said that for information warfare to be effective, it can’t just be employed during wartime, it must be deployed during peace time as well. The fact that one of their top military officers openly said this is extremely scary, but it speaks to the fact that they are proud of this capability and pride is a major motivation and benefit they receive from using it. They’ve now used it successfully and the Trump administration is their evidence of it (whether or not their operation was why he won).They’ve put the world on notice. One of the questions in the recent House Intelligence Committee hearing asked FBI Director Comey why the Russians didn’t try to cover their tracks better, why they seemed to have acted in the loudest possible way so it was clear that the hacking was done by them.Comey’s response: “I think part, their number one mission is to undermine the credibility of our entire democracy enterprise of this nation. And so, it might be that they wanted us to help them by telling people what they were doing. Their loudness in a way would be counting on us to amplify it by telling the American people what we saw and freaking people out about how the Russians might be undermining our elections successfully.” They’re proud of it. They want everyone in the world to know they are once again a major power in the world, a force to be reckoned with, not some regional power but a world power that should not be trifled with.The loss of stature they’ve suffered since the end of the Cold War is very embarrassing to Russians and this is their new way to balance the scales, to proudly exert influence and compete with the western powers on equal terms (and for far less money than conventional military buildup requires). The very existence of the Trump presidency is proof to them that they are powerful forces to be feared and taken seriously, which they obviously consider beneficial.Other untold benefits we’re still discovering, since we just learned Trump’s campaign chairman was essentially on Putin’s payroll. New information is coming out every week. We recently learned that Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, was paid $10 Million/year by one of Vladimir Putin’s closest friends, specifically to influence American policy at the highest levels, for the benefit of Putin (Paul Manafort’s plan to ‘greatly benefit Putin government’). The administration has tried to say Manafort played a “limited role” in the campaign. That’s true if by limited they mean he only ran the campaign for a while, not the entire time. He replaced the guy that left after being arrested for assaulting a reporter (Corey Lewandowski) and was brought in to bring order to the very chaotic, unprofessionally run campaign, which he somewhat did, hard to believe as that may be, and Trump’s polling went up noticeably after he took over. He ran the campaign until he had to resign following some other mid-campaign Russia revelations. Also of note, he owns an apartment in Trump Tower.We can stop at 20 major benefits Russia gets from a Trump presidency, that’s a nice round number.Any two of these would’ve made this whole enterprise worth it, but all of them and potentially more? It’s expected they’re going to do a lot more “information warfare” going forward. European democracies with upcoming elections are worried they’ll pull the same thing there. The FBI Director recently said he expects Russia will try to meddle in future American elections again, too. We simply can’t fully comprehend the total benefit Russia gets from a Trump presidency. It has already gotten plenty, is still getting plenty, and looks likely to get more well into the future.To sum up, the ultimate goal of Russia is to strengthen itself and to weaken and undermine the West as much as possible, by diminishing its leadership, credibility, unity, and resolve, and especially its institutions and alliances. Russia certainly got their money’s worth with Donald J. Trump.

This article explains that Jeff Bezos also invested $250,000 in the first angel round in Google and that at today's prices his shares would be worth $1.6 billion.http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091005/new-yorker-bezos-initial-google-investment-was-250000-in-1998-because-i-just-fell-in-love-with-larry-and-sergey/I also just just found this well written article:http://www.theangelinvestor.com/article/100030;jsessionid=162352D2611033DDE9D8838BE85A3FF6/Google:-The-Worlds-greatest-Angel-Investment/Google: The World's greatest Angel InvestmentBrian Perry22-Aug-06We all know what an angel investor is or is supposed to be. For some of us, this conjures up images of near miss financial ruin and for others, a sense of financial bliss. But what does it really mean to have a “hit” with an angel investment? Do we all measure our success by the same results? For some of us, it might be a return of five times our investment over a five year period. For others, it might be looking for “the next big thing” with returns you can’t even fathom.In the hottest angel investment country in the World, the US, last year had some 227,000 angels and pumped $23 billion into start-ups, up 3% from 2004, according to the University of New Hampshire’s Centre for Venture Research. In 1996 there were only about ten angel groups in the U.S.; today there are more than 200. The single greatest reason for this change is the fact most Venture Capital firms have started to favour larger, later-stage investments and therefore leave a gap in funding for early stage businesses and start-ups.The UK market is also showing strong signs of angel investment activity. According to the British Venture Capital Association (BVCA), last year their members backed more than 1,300 UK businesses and almost 80% of these were made for less than £2m.The BVCA’s latest Report on Investment Activity shows that investment in start up businesses last year increased by a robust 67% to £160m.The number of early stage businesses receiving funding rose by 8% to almost 500 in 2005, representing almost 40% of all companies backed by the industry during the year.Angel investing isn’t something that has only been around since the 90’s. The common perception is that angels have been around since the days of Broadway and they were the people who “came from the heavens” to aid these hard to finance theatrical “businesses”. The reality is, angel investing has been around for as long as there have been businesses. Perhaps that Marrakesh spice merchant wanting a stand in the local souk 2000 years ago was started with a loan from an investor selling a goat. Chances are, the returns in those days were fairly modest compared to some of today but the fact still remains, angel investing has been around for a very long time and is likely to only increase in coming years.FAMOUS ANGEL INVESTMENTSMoving ahead a few years to the 1878 Paris Exhibition, a few highly prominent chaps by the name of J.P.Morgan and Spencer Trask decided to back a crazy idea called “electricity” that was being pitched by none other than Thomas Edison. No need to expand on the success of that angel investment. Some of the more famous angel investments include Ian McGlinn making an investment back in 1976 in an innovative little startup called The Body Shop. Back in 1994, there was a guy in the US selling books from his garage via the internet. 12 angels later and Amazon.com was born, 2005 sales were over $5 billion!Mark CubanThe wealthy Texan who sold Broadcast.com to Yahoo for $5.7 billion in 1999, recently signed on as an angel investor in Brondell, a San Francisco based manufacturer of Japanese-style toilet seats that wash and dry your behind. Some have questioned Cuban’s reasoning for doing such a deal. According to Brondell co-founder Scott Pinizzotto, Cuban looks for companies that target the masses. “There are 220 million residential toilets in the United States,” Pinizzotto explains. “That’s our installed base, and that’s what got Cuban excited.”1 In December, Cuban invested an undisclosed amount in the company, opening up the pearly gates for other angels: Brondell has now attracted $1.3 million in seed funding.Eric HahnEric Hahn is one of Silicon Valley’s superangels, a former Netscape CTO who has completed early stage investments in Good Technology, Opsware, red Hat, and Zimbra. He invests his own money, but only in start-ups that possess hard-to-replicate technology. “For example,” Hahn says, “I would have passed on eBay. It’s a great company, but it was mainly an exercise in building a brand.”2Andy BechtolsheimThe second most famous angel investment in recent years (number one to come shortly) was probably the $100,000 check that Sun Microsystems co-founder Andy Bechtolsheim made out to Google after watching Larry Page and Sergey Brin demonstrate their search-engine software. The check was uncashable at first, as a legal entity, Google didn’t exist yet, but once the company’s incorporation papers were completed and filed, the money enabled Page and Brin to move out of their dorm rooms and into the marketplace.Aside from the commonly talked about angel investment successes of Amazon and Body Shop, even the likes of Apple, Kinko’s and Starbucks all got their starts with the help of angel investors, as did current rising stars such as Digg, LinkedIn, and Simply Hired.However, as any angel is fully aware of, not all angel investments go as planned and produce those big hits all are striving for. Doug Richards knows this very well as an investment angel on BBC 2’s “Dragons’ Den”, one of a team of elite business people able to dash the hopes or make dreams come true for eager entrepreneurs with ideas to sell.During the first two series, Richard made eight investment offers of which two were accepted. Unfortunately for him, one of them has already failed but to a philosophical entrepreneur like Richard, that’s no big deal. “It’s part of the life of being a high risk angel investor,” he says. “I don’t begrudge the investment – but I lost it. £60,000.”3One thing all angels tend to agree on:“Devote only a small portion of your portfolio, say 3% to 10%, to such risky investments.”Google: The World’s Greatest Angel InvestmentHere is a brief summary of Google’s humble beginnings and straight from the company itself:According to Google lore, company founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin were not terribly fond of each other when they first met as Stanford University graduate students in computer science in 1995. Larry was a 24-year-old University of Michigan alumnus on a weekend visit; Sergey, 23, was among a group of students assigned to show him around. They argued about every topic they discussed. Their strong opinions and divergent viewpoints would eventually find common ground in a unique approach to solving one of computing’s biggest challenges: retrieving relevant information from a massive set of data.By January of 1996, Larry and Sergey had begun collaboration on a search engine called BackRub, named for its unique ability to analyze the “back links” pointing to a given website. Larry, who had always enjoyed tinkering with machinery and had gained some notoriety for building a working printer out of Lego™ bricks, took on the task of creating a new kind of server environment that used low-end PCs instead of big expensive machines. Afflicted by the perennial shortage of cash common to graduate students everywhere, the pair took to haunting the department’s loading docks in hopes of tracking down newly arrived computers that they could borrow for their network.A year later, their unique approach to link analysis was earning BackRub a growing reputation among those who had seen it. Buzz about the new search technology began to build as word spread around campus.1998: The search for a buyerLarry and Sergey continued working to perfect their technology through the first half of 1998. Following a path that would become a key tenet of the Google way, they bought a terabyte of disks at bargain prices and built their own computer housings in Larry’s dorm room, which became Google’s first data center. Meanwhile Sergey set up a business office, and the two began calling on potential partners who might want to license a search technology better than any then available. Despite the dotcom fever of the day, they had little interest in building a company of their own around the technology they had developed.Among those they called on was friend and Yahoo! founder David Filo. Filo agreed that their technology was solid, but encouraged Larry and Sergey to grow the service themselves by starting a search engine company. “When it’s fully developed and scalable,” he told them, “let’s talk again.” Others were less interested in Google, as it was now known. One portal CEO told them, “As long as we’re 80 percent as good as our competitors, that’s good enough. Our users don’t really care about search.”Touched by an angelUnable to interest the major portal players of the day, Larry and Sergey decided to make a go of it on their own. All they needed was a little cash to move out of the dorm — and to pay off the credit cards they had maxed out buying a terabyte of memory. So they wrote up a business plan, put their Ph.D. plans on hold, and went looking for an angel investor. Their first visit was with a friend of a faculty member.Andy Bechtolsheim, one of the founders of Sun Microsystems, was used to taking the long view. One look at their demo and he knew Google had potential — a lot of potential. But though his interest had been piqued, he was pressed for time. As Sergey tells it, “We met him very early one morning on the porch of a Stanford faculty member’s home in Palo Alto. We gave him a quick demo. He had to run off somewhere, so he said, ‘Instead of us discussing all the details, why don’t I just write you a check?’ It was made out to Google Inc. and was for $100,000.”The investment created a small dilemma. Since there was no legal entity known as “Google Inc.,” there was no way to deposit the check. It sat in Larry’s desk drawer for a couple of weeks while he and Sergey scrambled to set up a corporation and locate other funders among family, friends, and acquaintances. Ultimately they brought in a total initial investment of almost $1 million.Everyone’s favourite garage bandIn September 1998, Google Inc. opened its door in Menlo Park, California. The door came with a remote control, as it was attached to the garage of a friend who sublet space to the new corporation’s staff of three. The office offered several big advantages, including a washer and dryer and a hot tub. It also provided a parking space for the first employee hired by the new company: Craig Silverstein, now Google’s director of technology.Already Google.com, still in beta, was answering 10,000 search queries each day. The press began to take notice of the upstart website with the relevant search results, and articles extolling Google appeared in USA TODAY and Le Monde. That December, PC Magazine named Google one of its Top 100 Web Sites and Search Engines for 1998. Google was moving up in the world.1999: On the road againGoogle quickly outgrew the confines of its Menlo Park home, and by February 1999 had moved to an office on University Avenue in Palo Alto. At eight employees, Google’s staff had nearly tripled, and the service was answering more than 500,000 queries per day. Interest in the company had grown as well. Red Hat signed on as its first commercial search customer, drawn in part by Google’s commitment to running its servers on the open source operating system Linux.On June 7, the company announced that it had secured a round of funding that included $25 million from the two leading venture capital firms in Silicon Valley, Sequoia Capital and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. In a replay of the convergence of opposites that gave birth to Google, the two firms — normally fiercely competitive, but seeing eye-to-eye on the value of this new investment — both took seats on the board of directors. Mike Moritz of Sequoia and John Doerr of Kleiner Perkins — who between them had helped grow Sun Microsytems, Intuit, Amazon, and Yahoo! — joined Ram Shriram, CEO of Junglee, at the ping pong table that served as formal boardroom furniture.In short order, key hires began to fill the company’s modest offices. Omid Kordestani left Netscape to accept a position as vice president of business development and sales, and Urs Hölzle was hired away from UC Santa Barbara as vice president of engineering. It quickly became obvious that more space was needed. At one point the office became so cramped that employees couldn’t stand up from their desks without others tucking their chairs in first.No beta search engineThe gridlock was alleviated with the move to the Googleplex, Google’s current headquarters in Mountain View, California. And tucked away in one corner of the two-story structure, the Google kernel continued to grow — attracting staff and clients and drawing attention from users and the press. AOL/Netscape selected Google as its web search service and helped push traffic levels past 3 million searches per day. Clearly, Google had evolved. What had been a college research project was now a real company offering a service that was in great demand.On September 21, 1999, the beta label came off the website.Still Google continued to expand. The Italian portal Virgilio signed on as a client, as did Virgin Net, the UK’s leading online entertainment guide. The spate of recognition that followed included a Technical Excellence Award for Innovation in Web Application Development from PC Magazine and inclusion in several “best of” lists, culminating with Google’s appearance on Time magazine’s Top Ten Best Cybertech list for 1999.2000: Built-in innovationAt the Googleplex, a unique company culture was evolving. To maximize the flexibility of the work space, large rubber exercise balls were repurposed as highly mobile office chairs in an open environment free of cubicle walls. While computers on the desktops were fully powered, the desks themselves were wooden doors held up by pairs of sawhorses. Lava lamps began sprouting like multihued mushrooms. Large dogs roamed the halls — among them Yoshka, a massive but gentle Leonberger. After a rigorous review process, Charlie Ayers was hired as company chef, bringing with him an eclectic repertoire of health-conscious recipes he developed while cooking for the Grateful Dead. Sections of the parking lot were roped off for twice-weekly roller hockey games. Larry and Sergey led weekly TGIF meetings in the open space among the desks, which easily accommodated the company’s 60-odd employees.The informal atmosphere bred both collegiality and an accelerated exchange of ideas. Google staffers made many incremental improvements to the search engine itself and added such enhancements as the Google Directory (based on Netscape’s Open Directory Project) and the ability to search via wireless devices. Google also began thinking globally, with the introduction of ten language versions for users who preferred to search in their native tongues.Google’s features and performance attracted new users at an astounding rate. The broad appeal of Google search became apparent when the site was awarded both a Webby Award and a People’s Voice Award for technical achievement in May 2000. Sergey’s and Larry’s five-word acceptance speech: “We love you, Google users!” The following month, Google officially became the world’s largest search engine with its introduction of a billion-page index — the first time so much of the web’s content had been made available in a searchable format.Through careful marshalling of its resources, Google had avoided the need for additional rounds of funding beyond its original venture round. Already clients were signing up to use Google’s search technology on their own sites. With the launch of a keywordtargeted advertising program, Google added another revenue stream that began moving the company into the black. By mid-2000, these efforts were beginning to show real results.On June 26, Google and Yahoo! announced a partnership that solidified the company’s reputation — not just as a provider of great technology, but as a substantial business answering 18 million user queries every day. In the months that followed, partnership deals were announced on all fronts, with China’s leading portal NetEase and NEC’s BIGLOBE portal in Japan both adding Google search to their sites.To extend the power of its keyword-targeted advertising to smaller businesses, Google introduced AdWords, a self-service ad program that could be activated online with a credit card in a matter of minutes. And in late 2000, to enhance users’ power to search from anywhere on the web, Google introduced the Google Toolbar. This innovative browser plug-in made it possible to use Google search without visiting the Google homepage, either using the toolbar’s search box or right-clicking on text within a web page, as well as enabling the highlighting of keywords in search results. The Google Toolbar would prove enormously popular and has since been downloaded by millions of users.As 2000 ended, Google was already handling more than 100 million search queries a day and continued to look for new ways to connect people with the information they needed, whenever and wherever they needed it.4Ram ShriramIs there really any need to give you “the rest of the Google story”? We all know Google today as a common household name. With their recent IPO and surging stock prices, they have become one of the largest companies in the World. Wow, would I have ever loved to be an angel investor in Google! Wait a minute, what about those two guys briefly mentioned in “Google Lore”; Andy Bechtolsheim, who we always seem to hear about as the “golden boy” of Google and Ram Shriram. Who was that last one? Ram Shriram? Who is this Shriram angel investor and how come we don’t hear more about him? Did he make any money? Is he still part of the company? Let’s take a closer look.Ram Shriram Joined the Google board at its creation. Prior to that, Shriram was vice president of business development at Amazon. com, reporting to Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO. During Shriram’s tenure at Amazon.com he grew the customer base from 3 million to 11 million users. Prior to Amazon. com, Shriram was president of Junglee Corp., a company that Amazon acquired in 1998. Before joining Junglee, Shriram was an early member of the Netscape Communications executive team. He initiated and built relationships with a targeted set of partners worldwide, helping Netscape to build market share and revenue momentum. In 1996, Shriram crafted Netscape’s indirect channels of distribution worldwide, and managed several hundred people with 16 direct reports across three continents (North America, Europe, and Asia), producing well over half of Netscape’s $346 million annual revenue. A year later, Shriram oversaw the OEM and website sales functions at Netscape, and helped generate more than $100 million in revenue from Netscape’s high-traffic website alone.Shriram also serves on the board of Yodlee.com and Elance.com, and is a leading angel investor in Silicon Valley.Does Ram Shriram really have the Midas touch (as recently ranked by Forbes magazine as number 3 on their Midas List)? Is he in fact the greatest angel investor of all time? Really, who is this man?In a recent interview with John Heilemann from Business 2.0, Heilemann gives us some insight into “the man with the Midas touch”.Heilemann states that “Ram Shriram is by nature a cheerful, easygoing guy, but if you want to get him a little miffed, just call him an angel investor.” What! He doesn’t want to be called an angel investor? Why not? Should he not take pride in the fact he is possibly the greatest angel investor to have ever lived on this planet?Shriram likes to think of himself as a “start-up sherpa . Through his operating company Sherpalo, Shriram says he operates a very basic operation with no staff and no offices. How could this “start-up sherpa”, Google God and the managing partner of his investment firm Sherpalo not have an enormous infrastructure with staff buzzing all around? Shriram admits “I have no staff, no office, no institutional scaffolding. There are times I think it might be nice to have deep-pocketed limited partners to provide me with some cushion. But I enjoy having no responsibilities except to myself, financially. And so far it’s turned out quite well."5Hey wait a minute, are we talking about the real Ram Shriram here? Shriram’s angel investment in Google’s IPO netted him more shares than any other solo investor, 5.1 million which he literally paid pennies for each (not public knowledge but most expect his original investment was between $100,000 - $200,000 USD). Last count has him owning 2.8 million shares and guess what Google’s stock was trading at when this article was written? Are you sitting down? $418 per share. Yes, my calculator said “error” as well when trying to calculate how much this investment made him and how much Google stock he presently owns.So how did this regular man develop his Midas touch? Of course it all isn’t a matter of luck. Shriram has a fairly impressive resume and has worked with a great number of top US firms, pre and post bubble. He appears to me a man driven by working on only startups. Could that be the secret? If you visit his website, he makes it very clear what sort of companies he is looking to invest in;Disruptive technologies, i.e. technology that addresses an existing customer base and provides a product or service that meets an existing need more cheaply and/or more efficiently. For example, when CDs were introduced to the music business, they were a disruptive technology, changing the status quo, and requiring users to purchase new hardware, despite there being a significant installed-base of record players and record collections. (See The Innovator’s Dilemma by Clayton Christensen, copyright 1997, Harvard College.)We are especially interested in:Break-through ideas in consumer Internet services;Patent pending technology with mass commercial appeal; and/orCreative new business models that alter the status quo and make the world a better place as a result.6Shriram states he is never active in more than three or four startups at once. “Almost every day I’m physically at one of them,” he explains. “I stay close to the scene of the crime.”7Perhaps success comes to Shriram because he states his formula is relentless independence. “My only loyalty is to what’s best for business, not to any set of constituents,” he states. “Sometimes that means going against the founders, sometimes against the VCs. So my judgments may be wrong, but they won’t be biased judgments.”8If Google wasn’t enough to keep this happy angel happy, he continued building his portfolio which now includes the following companies:GooglePlaxo247customer.comElanceCombineNetYodleeTellmeBusiness SignaturesZazzle.comPodShow.comNaukri.comPlatial.comAcquisitions:Junglee (sold to Amazon.com)Enosys (sold to BEA Systems)Some reports are coming in that at least a couple of his portfolio companies are not performing very well. If they ultimately fail like so many other high risk start-ups will that tarnish the reputation of arguably the World’s greatest angel investor (sorry, “start-up sherpa”) ever? I wouldn’t count on it. Perhaps some people might think we only remember the failures in life but when you have a $1 billion plus (and counting) angel investment windfall with a return of somewhere around 10,000 times your original investment, you will be remembered for that for a long time to come. If his portfolio companies continue to grow and become a success, I can only imagine what sort of legacy this man (“sherpa”) shall leave behind. Ram Shriram has lived behind the public spotlight, unlike so many other high profile angels, and perhaps we can all learn a lesson or two from the man who made the greatest angel investment of all time.Sources Include:1, 2 Michael V. Copeland, Business 2.0 magazine, Cable News Network LP, LLLP3KnowledgeRICH 06/064Google Inc.6Sherpalo Ventures www.sherpalo.com5, 7, 8John Heilemann, Business 2.0 magazine, Cable News Network LP, LLLP

1. Jeep Purchase Scam (1948): The Jeep scandal came out in 1948 after the country's independence. After the Pakistani invasion, the Indian army needed jeeps. At that time, 1500 jeeps were ordered by 300 pounds per jeep, but until 1949, only 155 jeeps were reached, as well as most jeeps did not meet the standard. The then Indian High Commissioner VK Menon, who was present in Britain in the investigation, was found guilty, but nothing happened. On the contrary, Menon got the place in the Nehru Cabinet.2. The Cycle Import Scam (1951): Secretary of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, SA Venkataraman was. They were wrongly accused of issuing quota for importing bicycles to a company. In this case he had to go to jail.3. BHU Fund Scam (1956): In this scam related to education sector, some BHU officials have rigged the funds. The scam was at that time of Rs 50 lakhs.4. Haridas Mundra Case (1958): The case relating to life insurance corporation of India's 1.2 crore rupees was revealed in six companies established by Haridas Mundra, a resident of Kolkata. The then Finance Minister TT Krishnamachari, Finance Secretary HM Patel and LIC Chairman were found guilty in this case. In this case, the Finance Minister was removed from the post and Mundhra got 22 years in jail. This matter was disclosed by Feroz Gandhi in Parliament.5. Teja Loan Scam (1960): Businessman Jayant Dharm Teja took a loan of Rs.22 crores in 1960 to launch Jayanti Shipping Company and sent the money out of the country. Six years of imprisonment in this case.6. Pratap Singh Carro Scam (1963): The then Chief Minister of Punjab, Sardar Pratap Singh, was the first Chief Minister of the country who was accused of depositing more property than income. He was also accused of benefitting from the family members. Carro's complaint was made to then Prime Minister Nehru, but Nehru defended him.7. Patnaik 'Kalinga Tubes' case (1965): Former Chief Minister of Orissa, Biju Patnaik, was accused of helping Kalinga Tubes get a government contract in his private company. Biju Patnaik had to resign in this case.8. Maruti scam (1974): Maruti scam happened in 1974. The scandal of this scandal also reached to Mrs. Indira Gandhi. In this case, Sanjay Gandhi was helped to get a license to make a passenger car.9. Kuo Oil Deal (1976): In the Kuo Island Deal scam in the year 1976, the deal was filed by Indian Oil Corporation with a bogus company of 2.2 million Hong Kong. There are allegations of taking a bribe at large level.10. Antulay Trust: The echo of the Antulay Trust episode took place in 1981 and it was related to the cement scam in Maharashtra. The name of Chief Minister of Maharashtra, the then Chief Minister AR Antulay, came to light in a scandal. The charge against them was that they had collected money for the trust like Indira Gandhi Pratibha Pratishthan, Sanjay Gandhi Niruphar Yojana, Swavalamban Yojana etc.11. HDW Brokerage Case (1987): Germany's submarine maker HDW was blacklisted because it had allegations against him that he had given 20 crores as commission to the big and influential people.12. Bofors scandal (1987): In 1986, a deal to purchase 155 guns from Sweden's AB Bofors Company was fixed. It is said that the brokerage of Rs 64 crore was given to get the deal. Autobiography Quattrocchi and Rajiv Gandhi's name appeared in this scandal. Vishwanath Pratap Singh came to power by picking up this top scam in the country.13. St. Kitts case (1989): In this case VP Singh was accused of taking illegal money. PV Narasimha Rao was the Foreign Minister at the time. It was later found out that the documents which tried to implicate VP Singh, were signed in English, while Singh did not sign any official document in English.14. Harshad Mehta Kand (1992): In 1992, Harshad Mehta invested the money of the banks in the stock market with fraud, resulting in a loss of nearly Rs. 5000 crores to the stock market.15. Indian Bank (1992): In the year 1992, small corporate houses and exporting companies from the bank borrowed about 13,000 crores from the bank, but they never returned the money. At that time, the chairman of the bank was M. Gopalakrishnan.16. Fodder scam (1996): In 1996, the Chara Ghatale in Bihar had spread the sensation in the country because it was a scam which started from Rs. 2 crore and reached 360 crore rupees. The Chief Minister of Bihar is considered to be the chief minister of Bihar, Laloo Prasad Yadav, who is currently serving in jail.17. Lakkhu Bhai Pathak: A pickle trader living in England, Laloo Bhai Pathak, accused Narasimha Rao and Chandra Swamy of taking a bribe of Rs.10 lakhs.18. Telecom scam: Congress leader Sukhram Sharma, who was the then telecom minister, had alleged that he helped get a private company from Hyderabad, due to which the government had a loss of Rs 1.6 crore. In 2002, he had to go to jail even in this case.19. Urea Scam: National Ramadan Fertilizer Company MD, S. Ramakrishnan, along with several other traders, who were close to Narasimha Rao, had lented a sum of Rs 133 crores to the government in the case of importing two lakh tonnes of urea. This urea never reached India.20. Havalai scam: The matter of sending money outside the country to the common Indians was due to the scandal. In 1991, the CBI conducted raids on several hawala operators. SK Jain's diary was recovered in this raids.21. Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (1993): At the time of PV Narasimha Rao, leader of Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, Shailendra Mahato revealed that he and his three MPs were given 30-30 lakh rupees to save Narasimha Rao by supporting the government. . Shibu Soren had to go to jail in this case.22. Chinese scandal: In 1994, the then food supply minister Kalpatha Roy had decided to import sugar from the market price at a much higher rate. In this Chinese scandal, the government loses 650 crores of rupees. In this case, Rai's chair also went away and he had to go to jail.23. Shoe Scam: This case was disclosed in 1995 and many government officials, officers of Maharashtra State Finance Corporation, Citibank, Bank of Oman, Dena Bank etc. were also found involved in this case. Indeed, a businessman named Sohin Daya, along with Rafiq Tejani of Metro Shoes and Kishore Signapurak of Milano Shoes, made many fake leather cooperative societies and looted government money.24. Tehelka Kand: The sting operation of Tehelka, a media house, disclosed how some senior leaders mess up in the defense agreement. Taking a bribe to Bangaru Laxman, the then national president of BJP, people are seen in television and in newspapers. The name of the then Defense Minister George Fernandes and former Indian Navy Chief Admiral Sushil Kumar also came out in this scandal. George had to resign from the post of minister.25. Match fixing: In the year 2000, the match marks of match-fixing in Gentleman Sports i.e. meant for Indian players for the first time. The names of Azharuddin and Ajay Jadeja are prominently highlighted in this. Ajay Sharma and Azhar were banned for life, Jadeja and Manoj Prabhakar were banned for five years.26. Barak Missile Deal: Another sample of corruption in the Barak missile defense deal was seen in the purchase of the Barak missile. It was to be bought from Israel, which cost $ 270 million. APJ Abdul Kalam, the then president of the DRDP, also objected to the deal. Still, the deal happened.27. UTI scam: According to the allegation, this scam of Rs 48 thousand crore was done jointly with former UTI chairman PS Subramaniam and two directors MM Kapoor and SK Basu. All of them were arrested, but no one got the punishment.28. Grain for Oil: Based on the Volcker report, it was revealed that the then Foreign Minister Natwar Singh misused his position to get his son oil contract. They had to resign.29. Taj Corridor: Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati has been continuously hanging on a sword in the Taj corridor scam of 175 crores and is still hanging. The CBI has this case and after the political convenience, when open and closed.30. Koda Money Laundering case: How can one earn billions of money while being the Chief Minister proves that Jharkhand Chief Minister Madhu Koda? He made more than 4 thousand crore blacks. Invested abroad. The whip has also been in jail in this case.31. Adarsh ​​Scam: Ideal Cooperative Society (L) has illegally constructed the building around Navi Nagar and Defense Establishment in the residential area of ​​Colaba. This plan was made for the families of the martyred people in Kargil war, while 80 percent of its flats were allocated to civilian citizens. In this case, then Chief Minister Ashok Chavan had to resign.32. Coffin scam: A very bogus case emerged after the Kargil war between India and Pakistan in the year 1999. During 1999-2000, there was a deal with a US company to buy 500 aluminum coffins and 3,000 bodybust bags. Such things also came to light that there was a huge scandal in the coffins procured.33. Bombay Stock Exchange scam: This JPC was formed after the charges against Harshad Mehta, a stock dealer who was involved in the stock market scam in 1992. It was alleged that Mehta had misused the money of public sector company Maruti Udyog Limited. The Sensex dropped by 570 points due to Mehta's non-payment of futures contracts. The CBI conducted 600 civil cases in addition to recording about 72 criminal cases, but only four of these cases were filed in the charge sheet. In September 1999, Mehta was sentenced to four years in jail for fraud with the Maruti industry and died in jail.34. Security scam: In 1992, Harshad Mehta invested the money of banks in the stock market with fraud, resulting in a loss of about Rs. 5000 crore on the stock market. Similarly, another stock broker Ketan Parekh had scam Rs 1,000 crore.35. IPL scandal: IPL chief Lalit Modi was suspended from the post following the termination of IPL-3 due to financial irregularities. The investigation of the case is still going on. Blue corner notice was also issued against Modi. There was talk of a scandal involving Rs 1200-1500 crore in IPL. Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals were banned for this scam.36. Satyam scam: Satyam scam was the biggest scandal in the corporate world. At that time, India's largest IT company, Satyam Computer Services, lent the amount of 14 thousand crores to the country through real estate and share market.37. Stamp scam: Abdul Karim Telgi made a lease of Rs 20 thousand crore by misappropriating stamp. The special point of the scandal was that Telgi got full support from the government, which led to the manipulation of the stamp.38. Hasan Ali tax evasion case: The country's biggest alleged tax evader, Hasan Ali, was charged with tax evasion of more than Rs 40,000 crore. Hasan Ali and his assistants are accused of possessing black money abroad. Hasan Ali has alleged that he has kept $ 8 billion in Swiss banks. According to the allegation, he hid his income and has not filed income tax return since 1999.39. Commonwealth Games scam: In this case about 70 thousand crore rupees scandal has been revealed. In this case, chiefly organizing committee chairman Suresh Kalmadi and his colleagues are included.40. 2G Spectrum scam: It is said that in this entire case, the treasury of the country suffered loss of 176 thousand crores. Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former communications minister A. The king was held responsible. In December 2017, the CBI Court released all the accused in the case and said that this was a wrong case. It was believed that this scam did not happen.41. Vijay Mallya Case: Vijay Mallya, who has been declared a runaway by the court after several investigations started in different defaulting loan cases of 9000 crores of banks, is currently living in Britain.42. PNB scam: Neerav Modi and his Mama Mehul Vigilance scam Rs 11,300 crore in Punjab National Bank through Letter of Undertaking (LoU). Both are absconding after the country's largest banking fraud.43. RotorMac scam: Enforcement Directorate (ED) has registered a case of money laundering after the CBI in the case of loan fraud against Rotomac Penn company owner Vikram Kothari. The shocking thing is that Kothari has siped 3,695 crores to the public sector banks.And latest biggest Scam of All timePNB scam is bigger than this, Gujarat's Bitcoin scam, story too complete filmIn Gujarat, about 3 billion dollars (2 trillion rupees) worth of checkout of Bitcoin crime, the things that are coming up, a great Hollywood movie or web series may be ready. Actually, the spices that are needed for the movie, and the action-filled film, are in it. For example, kidnapping, fugitive leader, disputed decision by the central government, corrupt police, corrupt merchant, a victim who is also suspect and yes, cryptokransy bitcoin also. This matter is bigger than the PNB scam, keep in mind that the PNB scam is worth 1.3 trillion rupees.