I Have An Ownership Interest Of At Least 5 Percent In: Fill & Download for Free

If you care about being upper middle class, i.e. part of the top 10%, 5%, or even 1% but not necessarily the top 0.1%, here are some suggestions:- Be American. Speak English fluently. Live in a coastal city or be involved in a booming rural industry.- Be college educated, and personable.- Pick a profession, be good at it. Get promoted.- Save your money, invest it. Save more and invest that.- Own a business. Even non-glamorous ones (i.e. work at a profession, invest your savings in a fast food franchise).- Marry well (i.e. someone else who has these attributes).If you care about being astronomically rich, i.e. the difference between the 1% and the 0.1%, then you need something else. The cuttoff for the 1% is $506,000 annual salary. A lot, but not that much when you look at wages of the genuinely rich. The 0.1% has an annual income of at least $2.5 million a year. That isn't wages. That's capital.To be part of the genuinely rich you need capital. Capital takes time, theft or luck. And capital markets.Yes, we have people like Gates, and Buffet and Zuckerberg who got rich. But most other inherited it. The 0.1% is still over a 100,000 households. They didn't all make internet companies. Most inherited ownership interest in profitable businesses, and kept the businesses or sold the stock and invested the proceeds in other profitable businesses.To be comfortable, get a profession and marry well in the USA.To be rich rich, get lucky, or have different parents.

Hello my dear friends I will try to give idea about best business moves in the world.Once in a while, every great leader makes a groundbreaking decision that shift not only the strategy of a single company but how everyone else plays in the arena.Some of these business decisions are counterintuitive, at times they are sly and gambit. In hindsight, these business decisions involve drama, doubt and tension.What made Henry Ford sell his company to the shareholders? What motivated McDonalds to plant seeds in the middle of a highway? Why does Starbucks own so many stores?In the following stories, you’ll learn how some of the smartest business moves in history have shaped the thinking of today’s industry leaders.“Smartest Business Moves in HistorySome of these stories below will also provide the background to pivotal moments. This is how it’s done:1. HollisterEver wondered why Hollister stores are so dimly lit and loud?The subsidiary label of Abercrombie & Fitch markets itself towards 14 to 18 year-olds.Its stores set the lighting low to create a laid back, beach-club style environment, complete with ear-splittingly loud music. The clothes are sprayed with an intoxicating scent that lingers long after you’ve left the store.Moreover, all stores are strategically placed in the mall near benches and at least 3 doors or fewer away from Starbucks.“You can’t see the prices, and you keep bumping into people or tables,” said Sarah Gaffney, 51. “Because it’s so dark and loud,I wait outside at a nearby Starbucks or Cinnabon while my daughter is shopping inside.”Adults get annoyed when the stores are so dark and they’re tripping over tables, and bumping into fellow shoppers. Besides, teenage customers spend more when parents aren’t hanging around them.Now you know why Hollister stores are so damn dark and a few feet away from Starbucks to keep parents out of the store even longer.2. StarbucksIt’s unusual for a coffee chain to add six stores a day on an average. Starbucks has 24,000 stores worldwide, including 8,000 company owned, and 7,000 licensed locations.There are at least nine Starbucks per square mile in Manhattan. In London, two Starbucks sit across from each other on James Street, close enough that baristas could toss coffee beans at one another if they wanted to.Despite such saturation, the company insists on not cannibalizing of its existing business when a new store opens. One reason, potential customers don’t buy a Starbucks drink because the line is too long.Second, two Starbucks stores a couple of blocks away from each other are enough to take the business away from local coffee shops until they can’t sustain the losses anymore.Slowly, Starbucks cannibalizes one of its coffee shops until only one remains to be profitable.3. David RicardoDavid Ricardo was one of the most influential economists of the 17th century.He distilled the principle of Theory of Comparative Advantage among other things, and is often considered the second-most important classical economists after Adam Smith.While a stock broker in 1815, Ricardo made it publicly known that he was sending observers to the mainland to report back immediately on the results of battle between Napoleon and the coalition forces.As soon as his observer gets back, he sells off all his English securities giving the impression that Napoleon won Waterloo, the market is going to crash. This caused a huge panic and the price of British securities plummeted.He then went on the buy everything back in at low prices, until everyone found out that the British won the batter of Waterloo.David Ricardo retired with one million pounds sterling, and died a couple of years later as one of the richest men in London.(Today, such practices wouldn’t be touted as some of the smartest business moves. In fact, it is now called insider trading and would land you in jail.)4. Henry FordIn 1916, minority shareholders John and Horace Dodge claimed that Henry Ford had cheated original shareholders of potential income by pricing cars too low.The courts ruled in favor of the shareholders saying that Henry Ford as a director of Ford Motor Co. had to legally act in the best interests of the shareholders. In this case, the dividend payment were the most benevolent choice.Furious, Ford decided to take advantage of a legal loophole in order to gain full ownership of the company.Henry Ford turned the ownership to his incompetent son, Edsel Ford. He also started another company, Henry Ford and Son, and threatened to take some of the most earnest employees to his new company.The ultimate goal was to scare the shareholders enough that they would sell their stakes to him before they lost all of its value.The scheme worked and Ford and Edsel bought all remaining stock from the rest of the investors, thus gaining full ownership of the company.The gambit may look immoral and sly, but it was such a well thought out plan that it helped Ford get what he wanted.5. McDonald'sA few years ago, McDonald's got hold of a ton of seeds to yellow California poppies that is extremely rare in California. They planted a giant M sign on a hill next to the side of a highway. No one was told about the ploy and no one knew until the famous golden arches grew. The flower is so rare that it is illegal to pluck or cut them.McDonald's got free advertisement from the environmental graffiti. In addition, the patch of land it grows on now has a breath of fresh flora.6. VolkswagenFor years, Porsche had been trying to buy Volkswagen. In the midst of the 2008 Financial Crisis, when automakers were among those most battered, investors shorted Volkswagen shares, expecting the price to plummet further.A few months later, Porsche announced it held call options on Volkswagen shares equivalent to 32 percent of the company, in addition to the 43 percent it already owned.It could control up to 74 percent of Volkswagen shares. Meanwhile, the German state, Lower Saxony owned 20 percent of Volkswagen, leaving only 5 percent of shares available to the market.A day after Porsche made the announcement, those with short positions struggled to cover them immediately. Soon they realized that the measly amount of available shares would cause enough stir for Volkswagen shares to skyrocket.This is exactly what happened – Volkswagen shares went from €200 to well over €1,000 – making it the world’s most valuable company. On the other hand, short sellers were ruined.7. LiquidSoapConsumers around the world use liquid soap and prefer it over its solid counterpart. Little do we know that it was a small company called Minnetonka Corp. to make the world’s first liquid soap.There was a little hiccup though when the owner realized he couldn’t complete against giants like Unilever and Palmolive. Minnetonka had a game-changing product in their hands, however, it was a small time firm. It did not have deep pockets to gain a substantial market share.It had to prevent other companies from getting their liquid soaps to market. They realized that one key aspect of the liquid soap was the dispensing of the soap itself through the bottle’s pump. At the time, the patent for the pump was closely held by only two manufacturers in the United States.And so, Minnetonka purchased 100 million small bottle hand-pumps from the only two manufacturers that made them. This would prevent other companies from being able to buy pumps for at least a year.A year was enough for the company to establish the brand name. This also meant that even if companies like Unilever and P&G were quick enough to replicate the product, Minnetonka would still have a one year lead.The trick worked: in less than six months, Minnetonka sold $25 million worth of Softsoap. A few years later, the company sold his two brands – Village Bath and SoftSoap to Colgate-Palmolive Co. for $61 million. Two years later, Unilever bought Minnetonka Corp.”Content taken from “ Business Magazine - News, Articles for the World's Business Leaders”Thanks and best of luck.Please upvote if you like my answer.

This is a very interesting question.I will try to divide this answer into sections (Housing , economic growth and wages, healthcare, education, competitiveness) and compare the performance of the United States with Norway, Sweden and Denmark.[A]Economic Growth and Wages[i] Both United States and Scandinavian countries are highly developed countries with a market economy. GDP per capita is mostly similar , with the United States ($54 k) ahead of Denmark ($ 44 k) ,Sweden ($46 K) and Finland ($40 k) but behind Norway($67 K).An important thing to note however, is that the number of hours worked per worker is greater in the United States by at least 20 percent. In terms of productivity or output produced per hour, they are fairly close. The United States still is ahead of all Scandinavian countries with exception of Norway.[ii]The economic growth of all these countries have been fairly similar. Post 2008, economic growth has slowed down considerably in both Scandinavia and the United States. The United States did better than Denmark, Finland and is on par with Sweden and Norway.Denmark has suffered partly because of the fall in housing prices in the real estate sector [1], while Finland has suffered considerably because of its decline in export competitiveness [2]. Norway and Sweden have been resilient like the United States though the recovery from the financial crisis has been slower than previous ones.Norway unlike other Scandinavian countries exports oil and hence has been affected by the sharp drop in oil prices. Economic growth has become negative in the last quarter.[iii] The mean wages in the United States is higher than its Scandinavian counterparts. The average annual income in the United States is $57 k which is ahead of Norway ($ 49 k), Sweden ($ 40 k) and Denmark ($ 49 k) [3]. However, the income distribution is skewed somewhat higher in the United States than in Scandinavia. The professional and management workers earn higher salaries than their counterparts in Scandinavia. The median wages are fairly similar for both though given the number of hours worked, Scandinavian countries come out of top [4].[B].Housing[i]. Home ownership rate is lower in the United States (65 percent) than in Norway (81 percent), Finland(74 percent), Sweden (70 percent) but higher than Denmark (63 percent) [5].[ii].In dwellings which do not have basic facilities, the United States is higher at 0.1 percent as compared to Sweden (0 percent) but lower than corresponding rates for Denmark (0.9 percent), Finland (0.6 percent) and Norway(0.3 percent). [6][C].Education[i]. In terms of percentage of population who hold a tertiary degree, the United States (44 percent) ranks ahead of Finland (42 percent), Denmark ( 36 percent), Sweden ( 39 percent) and Norway (42 percent) [7].[ii]. The United States however is different from these countries in the sense, that education is financed through student loans whereas Scandinavian countries fund it through public taxation which is heavier in Scandinavian countries than the United States. In terms of total spending on higher education, the United States spends considerably larger amount than its Scandinavian counterparts [8].[D]. Healthcare[i]. The life expectancy is higher in Scandinavian countries ranging from 80 years to 81 years while it is 78 years in United States. The average spending per household is significantly higher in the United States. The United States spends around 18 percent of GDP on healthcare as compared to Scandinavia which spends around 9 to 11 percent of GDP. However, it is important to note that a large part of spending on healthcare in the United States occurs in later years (particularly from age 60) and till then its spending is on par with most of the world. [9].[Update : See Tom Musgrove's comment][ii]. In a survey , United States was ranked at 31st position behind Sweden and Norway but ahead of Denmark. That report however, has led to some debate on its methodology. You can read the whole thing and decide for yourself.[10][E]. Competitiveness[i]. The United States ranks ahead of Scandinavian countries in terms of competitiveness [11]. The US benefits from its capacity to innovate thanks to having a large of number of very high quality research institutions, high spending on Research and Development, a large market size and a highly developed financial sector.[ii]. Scandinavian countries do not have the advantage of a large market as United States though they have signed a number of free trade agreements and are generally have open market economies to counteract that disadvantage. Financial institutions (banking institutions) are exceptionally well developed though bond and stock markets are comparatively less well developed.An important side note is that while welfare spending is much more generous, taxes are also significantly higher on everyone.Notes:[1]. Denmark House Price Index[2]. What’s happening to Finland’s economy?[3]. Average annual wages[4]. Median household income[5]. List of countries by home ownership rate[6]. Better Life Index - Edition 2015[7]. The Most Educated Countries in the World[8]. http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/48630868.pdf[9].[10].http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/whr00_en.pdf[11].Competitiveness Rankings