LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS SANDTON, SOUTH AFRICA – JUNE 11: George Robson looks on during the England training session held at St. David’s School on June 11, 2012 in Sandton, South Africa. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images) Starting XV:15, Alex Goode, 14 David Strettle, 13 Anthony Allen, 12 Jordan Turner-Hall, 11 Christian Wade, 10 Charlie Hodgson, 9 Danny Care, 1 Matt Mullan, 2 Joe Gray, 3 Paul Doran Jones, 4 Graham Kitchener, 5 George Robson (C), 6 James Haskell, 7 Carl Fearns, 8 Thomas WaldromReplacements16 Tom Youngs, 17 Rupert Harden, 18 Tom Palmer, 19 Jamie Gibson, 20 Lee Dickson, 21 George Lowe, 22 Nick Abendanon Nick Abendanon, who joined the England camp this morning to replace the injured Mike Brown, took a full part in training and will be on the replacements’ bench.England v SA Southern Barbarians,Wednesday, 13 June 2012 at GWK ParkKick:off: 1400 BST, live on Sky Sports HD Robson will captain England against SA BarbariansGEORGE ROBSON will captain England in Wednesday’s match against the South Africa Southern Barbarians in Kimberley.In a double for Aviva Premiership club Harlequins, Robson will follow Chris Robshaw in leading a team out in the second tour match at GWK Park.The starting line-up is completely changed from the one for the 1st Test in Durban and England Head Coach Stuart Lancaster said: “Every one of the 22 is desperate to play. They have trained superbly and their attitude while waiting for their chance has been first class. There is a lot of competition for places across the board and Wednesday gives these players a chance to lay down a marker and for the whole squad to build some momentum towards Saturday’s Test.“George (Robson) has had a tremendous season for Harlequins, has made a great contribution to this tour already, both in training and as part of the leadership group, and I know he will captain the team well. Only Ugo Monye and Alex Corbisiero will not have had any game time by the end of Wednesday but there will still be three matches to go and their opportunity will come.”
“COPY” Spain Architects: Studio RHE Year Completion year of this architecture project Houses CopyHouses•Caldes de Malavella, Spain La Vinya / Studio RHE Save this picture!+ 22 Share Year: Projects ShareFacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappMailOrhttps://www.archdaily.com/868034/la-vinya-studio-rhe Clipboard ArchDaily CopyAbout this officeStudio RHEOfficeFollowProductsWoodSteelConcrete#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousesCaldes de MalavellaSpainPublished on April 23, 2017Cite: “La Vinya / Studio RHE” 23 Apr 2017. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021.
104 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis1 If you want to add a fundraising campaign thermometer to your Web pages to indicate the campaign’s progress, we’ve come across a PHP-based open source facility that does that at no charge.Entropyfarm’s fundraising thermometer can be used in two ways. First, you can type in your fundraising goal and current amounts, and save the resulting graphic from their Web site. Secondly, you can copy the PHP code to your server. Both generate a graphic with the relevant figures and currency.Indeed, you can choose to display your figures in one of five currencies, including sterling and euros. Advertisement AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis1 Some of the many users of the thermometer haven’t stopped at the Web. Some say they’ve used it in newsletters and Word documents.As with any open source tool you are encouraged to make a donation if you choose to use it. Tagged with: Digital Research / statistics Free fundraising campaign thermometer for Web page Howard Lake | 27 July 2004 | News About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving.
SHARE Facebook Twitter By Andy Eubank – May 1, 2012 SHARE Home Indiana Agriculture News Voting Underway for 2012 America’s Farmers Mom Of The Year Online voting is currently underway on www.AmericasFarmers.com to determine the national winner of Monsanto’s 2012 America’s Farmers Mom of the Year contest.From a pool of nearly 1,000 worthy candidates, judges from American Agri-Women and Monsanto have selected five amazing farm moms from across the country as regional winners. Each regional winner was awarded a $5,000 cash prize from Monsanto. The regional winner receiving the most online votes by May 12 will win an additional $5,000 and the 2012 national America’s Farmers Mom of the Year title.The regional winners are:Northwest Region: Danni Beer, Keldron, S.D.Southwest Region: Debbie Lyons-Blythe, White City, Kan.Midwest Region: Sherri Lynn Kannmacher, Martinsville, Ill.Northeast Region: Sarah Peterson, Niles, Mich.Southeast Region: Delores “DeeDee” Clements Darden, Smithfield, Va.A profile of each, along with her winning nomination, will remain posted on AmericasFarmers.com until May 12, the voting deadline. The national winner will be announced on Sunday, May 13 – Mother’s Day.The American Agri-Women, a national coalition of women’s farm, ranch and agribusiness organizations, evaluated nominations on how each farm mom nominee supports to her farm, family, community and the agricultural industry.“Despite the great geographic distance that separates our 2012 regional winners, they share a common passion for their families and the land, crops and animals they care for,” says Consuelo Madere, America’s Farmers Mom of the Year spokesperson. “Each is known in her community for putting a smiling face on agriculture and illustrating that the food on our grocery store shelves is grown by hard-working American farm families.”The five 2012 America’s Farmers Mom of the Year regional winners collectively produce a variety of crops and livestock, including corn, soybeans, cotton, peanuts, wheat, pumpkins, hay, sunflowers, wheat, alfalfa, flax and beef cows. They are active in agricultural organizations including FFA; 4-H; Farm Bureau; state soybean, small grains, livestock and Angus associations; state grain producer’s board; national peanut board; National Cattlemen’s Beef Association; Cattlemen’s Beef Board; and many more outstanding agricultural groups.Monsanto’s America’s Farmers Mom of the Year is an extension of the America’s Farmers program, which celebrates the contributions of America’s farmers, who provide food, energy and clothing for a growing planet. Visit AmericasFarmers.com to vote for the 2012 national farm mom winner and to read about other ways Monsanto is recognizing the contributions of American farmers.Source: Monsanto Voting Underway for 2012 America’s Farmers Mom Of The Year Facebook Twitter Previous articleCo-ops Support Farm Bill Dairy PlanNext articleDemand for Diesel Vehicles Welcomed by National Biodiesel Board Andy Eubank
ColumnsCompetition Jurisprudence In India Saima Hassan10 March 2021 6:06 AMShare This – x’Antitrust laws … are the Magna Carta of free enterprise. They are as important to the preservation of economic freedom and our free-enterprise system as the Bill of Rights is to the protection of our fundamental personal freedoms.’ According to the World Bank and Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report “Competition is a situation in a market in…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?Login’Antitrust laws … are the Magna Carta of free enterprise. They are as important to the preservation of economic freedom and our free-enterprise system as the Bill of Rights is to the protection of our fundamental personal freedoms.’ According to the World Bank and Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report “Competition is a situation in a market in which firms or sellers independently strive for the buyers’ patronage in order to achieve a particular business objective for example, profits, sales or market share”. The aim of Competition is to ensure that consumers pay the lowest possible price coupled with the highest quality of the goods and services which they consume. In an industry where there is healthy competition, often, there is a tendency, that the industry would become better and efficient. Competition is a situation where the market remains accessible to potential new enterprises and that enterprises operate under the compulsion of competition. Competition is an important requisite in the efficient functioning of markets. It benefits consumer by encouraging innovation, efficiency and widening of choice, enabling consumers to buy the goods and services at a reasonable price and contributing to our national competitiveness. Law is an instrument to regulate human behaviour, be it social life or business life. With the emergence of string and dominating market players, law was required to regulate their behaviour in the market. Competition cannot be left unfettered in the belief that it will drive out unfair trade practices. Free trade, in the modern and technologically more complex age, does not provide all the safeguards. The makers of the constitution had realized that in a country like India, political democracy would be useless without economic democracy. Accordingly, they incorporated few provisions in the constitution with a view to achieve amelioration of the socioeconomic condition of the masses. By the Constitution Amendment Act of 1976, we the people of India have accepted a socialistic pattern of society as our goals. One of the principal methods for establishing such a society is preventing concentration of economic power in few hands or institutions. The Directive Principles are designed to usher in a social and economic democracy in the country. These principles obligate the state to take positive action in certain direction in order to promote the welfare of the people and achieve economic democracy. These principles give directions to the legislature and executive in India as regards the manner in which they should exercise their power. To preserve the laudable ideals of free enterprises and protection of the consumer, the state has to intervene to regulate trade and commerce so that there is no undue concentration of means of production and market dominance, which is inimical to the welfare of the society. The term competition can be correlated with trade. Even Article 19 (1) (g) guarantees to all citizens, the right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Further, Article 38 and 39 lay down that state shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may, a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of national life and the state shall in particular, direct its policy towards securing: That the ownership and control of material resources are distributed to sub-serve the common good andThat the operation of economic system does not result in concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment. It is important to understand the economic milieu which led India to enactment of MRTP Act, 1969. There were many enquiries/studies, which acted as the lodestar/guide for the enactment of the MRTP Act. The first study was conducted by Mahalanobis Committee appointed by government in 1960 on distribution of income and levels of living in the country. The committee in its report noted that the planned economy encouraged the process of concentration by facilitating and aiding the growth of big business. It further observed that big government institutions such as IFC (Industrial Finance Corporation), LIC etc., have aided to the monopolistic growth. Another study was known as Monopolies Inquiry Commission (MIC) appointed under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 to enquire into the extent and effects of concentration of economic power in private hands and the prevalence of monopolistic and restrictive trade practices in important sectors of economic activity other than agriculture with special reference to: the factors responsible to such concentration and monopolistic and restrictive practices,their social and economic consequences, and the extent to which they might work to the common detriment; andSuggest such legislation and other measures that might be considered necessary in the light of such inquiry including in particular any new legislation to protect essential public interest and the procedure and agency for the enforcement of such legislation. The MIC submitted its report in 1965 to the government of India, wherein it underscored that there was high concentration of economic power in most of industrial items in India. The committee also noted that dominant positions allowed firms to manipulate prices and output and even non-dominant producers and manufacturers engaged in restrictive practices. Further, the committee observed that big business houses were at an advantage in securing industrial licenses to open and expand undertakings. New entrants were at disadvantage since they had limited access to funds, the requirement of which had gone up considerably due to economies of scale based on contemporary technologies. The government policies were found to be chief cause of economic concentration. Monopoly power was defined by the MIC as the ability to dictate price and control the market. Monopolistic practices noticed by the MIC prompted it to state that every monopolistic practice is on the face of it a restrictive practice. The MIC came with a list of Restrictive trade practices that were prevalent– Hoarding, resale price maintenance, exclusive dealings, price fixation, and price discrimination. Instances of cartelization, boycott was also brought to its notice. Having noted special economic conditions prevailing in India, the MIC set out objectives for the legislative recommendations in terms of achieving highest possible production with least damage to people at large while securing maximum benefits. In order to achieve these objectives an independent body in form of autonomous commission was recommended which would act as watchdog to curb concentration of power. The Planning Commission of India subsequently appointed Hazari Committee to review the operation of existing industrial licensing system under Industrial (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The report of the committee concluded that the existent licensing system had resulted in disproportionate growth of some of the big houses in India. Following this the government appointed the Industrial Licensing policy Inquiry Committee to inquire into the working of licensing system in India. The committee submitted its report two years later and stated no specific instructions were given to licensing authorities for preventing concentration and monopolistic tendencies. Accepting the fact Industrial Licensing policy favoring the large industrial houses stated that it was not necessary to grant multiple licenses to the same house in any given industry. The committee also observed that licensing was unable to check concentration and consideration of preventing monopolies doesn’t seem to have entered the picture at all. Thus, industrial licensing system specifically meant to implement the industrial policy of government failed miserably to achieve the objective of planned economic development. The committee also recognized the fact that industrial licensing was a negative instrument and as such could only play a limited role in industrial development. It was finally suggested by the committee that Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Bill as proposed by MIC be passed as an effective Legislative regime. The model of the act was given by Monopolies Inquiry Commission set by the government in 1964. The MIC drafted a bill to provide for operation of economic system so as not to result in concentration of economic power to the common detriment. The Bill, drafted by the MIC and amended by a Committee of the Parliament, became the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 and was enforced from June 01, 1970. The Act drew its inspiration from the mandate enshrined in the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution, which aims at securing social justice with economic growth. The MRTP Act exempted governmental companies from its purview and focused only upon private entities. Perhaps the philosophy underlying the MRTP Act was that governmental companies were the champion of the public interest, and that private companies were the only entities for which regulation is necessary in order to promote the public interest. The statement of objects and reason mentioned that the Act was to provide that the operation of the economics system did not result in the concentration of economics power to the common detriment, for the control of monopolies, for the prohibition of Monopolistic and Restrictive Trade Practices and for the matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. The provisions of the Act, i.e. on Restrictive Trade Practices, including the resale maintenance were substantially based on the UK legislation and particularly Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956 and the Resale Price Act, 1964. Likewise, the provisions on Unfair Trade Practices were influenced by the UK’s Fair Trading Act, 1973, The antitrust legislations in US, notably the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act and Federal Trade Commission Act, and also legislations enacted in Japan, Australia, Canada and Germany legislation have also been a guide in framing the provisions relating to monopolistic, restrictive and Unfair Trade Practices. Less than a decade had elapsed after the MRTP Act came in force, when the Government appointed a high-powered expert committee on the Companies Act and the MRTP Act, under the Chairmanship of Justice Rajindar Sachar, to review and suggest changes required to be made to the MRTP Act. The Committee observed that it (MRTP Act) contained no provisions for the protection of consumers against false or misleading advertisements or other similar unfair trade practices and that they needed to be protected from practices which are resorted to by the trade and industry to mislead or dupe them. To quote the Sachar Committee: ‘Advertisements and sales promotion have become well established modes of modern business techniques. That advertisements and representations to the consumers should not become deceptive has always been one of the points of conflict between business and consumers’. The Sachar Committee, therefore, recommended that a separate Chapter should be added to the MRTP Act, 1969 defining various unfair trade practices, so that the consumer, the manufacturer, the supplier, the trader and other persons in the market can conveniently identify the practices, which are prohibited. The 1984 amendments to the Act brought unfair trade practices within its ambit. It was in 1991, that India took the initiative in favour of economic reforms consisting essentially of liberalisation and de-regulation. In a manner of speaking, India embarked on what may be described as the LPG regime, an acronym for liberalisation, privatisation, and globalisation. The march from a “command and control” regime to a regime based more on free market principles commenced its stride. It is worth noting that the economic reform undertaken since the early 1990s significantly changed the economic environment of the country. Before 1991, the Government had major stake in the industries rather than the private sectors. The government enacted Industrial Development and Regulatory Act (IRDA) which stated the procedure, rules, guidelines etc. for the private sectors to set up their industries. They did not allow any foreign investment in India as well. The rules and the procedures for setting up the private industries were stricter and expensive that major people backed out. The biggest issue was the licensing of the industries. It was not a cost effective way to set up an industry in India. Since there was no foreign investment in India this led to balance of payments. The Indian Economy was in a major debt which caused the government to mortgage their gold mines to the World Bank for the loan. By the year 1991, it was realised that India needs to set up a system for its economic growth. Then finance minister and former Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh brought the LPG policy and foreign investment in India. The complicated procedure for licence was removed except for few industries. The Government took various industries forming PSUs (Public Sector Units) such as SAIL (Steel Authority of India), ONGC (Oil and Natural Gas Corporation) etc. In October 1999, the Government of India appointed a High Level Committee on Competition Policy and Competition Law under the chairmanship of Mr. S. V. S. Raghavan to advise a modern competition law for the country in line with international developments, and to suggest a legislative framework, which may entail a new law or appropriate amendments to the MRTP Act. The Raghavan Committee noted that the MRTP Act had outlived its utility and that a new competition law was required for the country, in tune with the post-1991 LPG paradigm and same was reflected in the announcement of the Finance Minister in his budget speech in February 1999. He observed that, “The MRTP Act has become obsolete in certain areas in the light of international economic developments relating to competition laws. We need to shift our focus from curbing monopolies to promoting competition. The Government has decided to appoint a committee to examine the range of issues, and propose a modern competition law suitable for our conditions” (Parliament, 1999). Report of High Level Committee on Competition Policy and Law (Raghavan Committee Report) The Committee submitted its report to the Prime Minister on May 22, 2000 and made some recommendations. The committee recommended the enactment of an Indian Competition Act, setting up of a Competition Commission of India (CCI), the repeal of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act, 1969, and winding up the MRTP Commission. The pending cases in the MRTP Commission may be transferred to the concerned consumer Courts under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The pending MTP and RTP Cases in MRTP Commission may be taken up for adjudication by the CCI from the stages they are in. Further, the Committee suggested that state monopolies, government procurement and foreign companies should be subject to the Competition Law and Competition law should cover all consumers who purchase goods or services, regardless of the purpose for which the purchase is made. The Committee recommended that the unfair trade practice cases may be transferred to the consumer courts concerned under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the pending monopolies and restrictive trade practices cases in the MRTPC may be taken up for adjudication by the CCI. The Committee also believed that the repeal of the various laws mentioned would constitute the prerequisites for laying the foundation over which the edifice of the Competition Policy and the Competition Law needs to be raised. It was recommended that the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 may no longer be necessary except for location (avoidance of urban-centric location), for environmental protection and for monuments and national heritage protection considerations, etc. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the connected statutes need to be amended to provide for an easy exit to the non-viable, ill-managed and inefficient units subject to legal obligations in respect of their liabilities was also recommended. The Board for Industrial Finance & Restructuring (BIFR) formulated under the provisions of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 should be abolished. There should be necessary provision to examine and adjudicate upon anti-competitive practices that may accompany or follow developments arising out of the implementation of WTO Agreements. Particularly, agreements relating to foreign investment, intellectual property rights, subsidies, countervailing duties, antidumping measures, sanitary and technical barriers to trade and Government procurement need to be reckoned in the Competition Policy/Law with a view to dealing with anti-competitive practices. The competition law should be made extra territorial. It is pertinent to note that this High Level Committee only discussed the comparative approach with respect to existing laws in other countries in their recommendations in the report. It however does not mention the subject of imposing criminal sanctions on Individuals as a penalty. The High level Committee mentioned about the existing criminal penalties with reference to other jurisdictions only in passing reference. On the basis of the recommendations of the Raghavan Committee, a draft competition law was prepared and presented in November 2000, to the Government. A bill on the new competition law was introduced in Parliament, outlining the objects and reasons for its enactment. After considering the recommendations of the Standing Committee new law was passed by the Parliament in December 2002 and received the assent of President on January 13, 2003. The provisions of the Competition Act governing abuse of dominant position and anticompetitive agreements, including cartels, came into force on 20thMay 2009. The Competition Act became fully operational on 1st June 2011, with the coming into force of the provisions relating to the regulation of combination and merger control provisions. Soon after the CCI was established under the Act, a writ petition (Brahm Dutt v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) 490 of 2003) was filed before the Supreme Court of India, challenging the Rules prescribed by the Central Government under the Act for the selection of the Chairperson and other Members of the Commission. The Supreme Court observed that it might be appropriate to consider the creation of two separate bodies, one with expertise for advisory and regulatory functions and the other for adjudicatory functions, along with an appellate body based on the doctrine of separation of powers recognised by the Constitution of India. Thus, the Amendment Act of 2007 created two separate bodies, namely, (a) the Commission as a seven-member (one chairperson and 2-6 members) expert Body to function as a market regulator for preventing and regulating anti-competitive practices in the country and to carry on the advisory and advocacy functions in its role as a regulator; and(b) the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) as a three-member quasi-judicial body to hear and dispose of appeals against any direction issued or decision made or order passed by the Commission United States v. Topco Associates, Inc., 405 U.S. 596, 610 (1972). World Bank & OECD, “A Framework for the Design and Implementation of Competition Law and Policy,” Washington DC, 1999  The government of India appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Professor Mahalanobis to study the distribution and levels of income in the country in the year 1960.  The government of India appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Mr. Das Gupta in the year 1964.  Monopolies Inquiry Commission Report pg.125, Government of India, New Delhi 1965.  The Planning Commission of India appointed a committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. R. K. Hazari to review the working of Industrial licensing in the year 1967.  The government of India appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Mr. Subimal Dutt in the year 1967. Views are PersonalThe Author is a Research Associate at the Competition Commission of IndiaSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Story
The organisers of an ‘estate agents vs proptech’ debate taking place today are hoping to increase dialogue between the industry’s technology suppliers and help make their products more accessible to estate agents and will include a presentation by Google’s head of property in the UK, Duncan Watts (pictured).Agents may struggle to get tickets, though. Organiser BestAgent, the new free-to-use mobile agency CRM platform, says it has been rejecting ticket requests from estate agency groups in order to maximise the number of tech suppliers who can come. These now number 50, although the Property Franchise Group has made it onto the guest list.Tech companies attending the London event include the Tenancy Deposit Scheme, Lonres, ValPal, Yomdel, VTUK, Let MC, OneDome, EA Analytics, Goodlord, Viewber, Estates IT and View My Chain.BestAgent, which is the brainchild of entrepreneur Charles Wright, says it has 20 suppliers signed up, four pending and a further 30 companies who have expressed an interest.And since launching in June, Charles says 200 estate agents have so far registered to have accounts.Proptech peoplePanel members at the conference are a mix of proptech people and agents including Ian McKenzie, CEO of the Guild, London estate agent Kristjan Byfield, former NAEA president Katie Griffin, Reigate estate agent Perry Power and former agent and commentator Christopher Watkins.The conference is also going to be addressed by Google UK’s Head of Property, Duncan Watts.“I am excited to be part of this panel discussing what I think is the most pressing problem affecting the industry,” says Perry Power (pictured left).“It really is time the industry modernised with proptech. The BestAgent Marketplace concept is a great initiative. The current amount of repetition and duplication of data-entry caused by CRMs not connecting with other services is mind-boggling.“It takes agent teams away from doing what really matters, which is delivering a great client result and experience.”goodlord Katie Griffin Google Perry Power OneDome Let MC LonRes Bestagent Tenancy Deposit Scheme Duncan Watts EA Analytics Estates IT ValPal View My Chain Viewber VTUK Yomdel September 25, 2018Nigel LewisWhat’s your opinion? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles BREAKING: Evictions paperwork must now include ‘breathing space’ scheme details30th April 2021 City dwellers most satisfied with where they live30th April 2021 Hong Kong remains most expensive city to rent with London in 4th place30th April 2021 Home » News » Associations & Bodies » Google property chief to address gathering of agents and proptech firms previous nextProptechGoogle property chief to address gathering of agents and proptech firmsNew tech platform BestAgent says it wants conference to encourage more proptech suppliers to cooperate and reduce ‘mind boggling’ levels of double-data entering.Nigel Lewis25th September 201802,652 Views
Zoopla has revealed that it is to roll all its agent software offerings into a single, mobile enabled platform for its 10,000 estate agent customers over the next few years.The ‘new direction’ will be introduced slowly and is designed to help estate agents offer the kind of ‘always on’ hybrid-style service popular with consumers.This will include tools not just for agents but also their customers including landlords, tenants, vendors and buyers.“Our new software strategy will give agents the power of disruptive online and mobile technologies resulting in an improvement in the quality of leads and efficiencies for their businesses and, in turn, providing value to their customers,” says Charlie Bryant, Managing Director of Zoopla.To drive the changes the portal has created a new division which will invest several million pounds in new technology, lead by former Skype tech executive Carl Oliver.The initiative will see its various software offerings including Jupix, Alto, Expert Agent and PropertyFile eventually re-engineered into one CRM service, although this is not on the cards yet.Zoopla’s initiative is part of the portal’s drive to reposition itself as a provider of digital tools to agents following its £2.2 billion acquisition by US equity fund Silverlake last year.“With the property market facing mounting pressure from all angles, agents need innovative partners that will give them the competitive edge to be successful,” says Bryant.“Following ongoing engagement with our agent customers and the gathering of their feedback, we are investing heavily in technologies that will enable a truly hybrid property lifecycle.”Jupix Alto Alto Software Carl Olivier Charlie Bryant Zoopla May 23, 2019Nigel LewisWhat’s your opinion? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles Letting agent fined £11,500 over unlicenced rent-to-rent HMO3rd May 2021 BREAKING: Evictions paperwork must now include ‘breathing space’ scheme details30th April 2021 City dwellers most satisfied with where they live30th April 2021 Home » News » Zoopla reveals major shake-up for its software services previous nextProducts & ServicesZoopla reveals major shake-up for its software servicesMillions are to be spent unifying its various agent software brands and services into one ‘hybrid’ style CRM system.Nigel Lewis23rd May 201901,401 Views
West Virginia University School of Medicine and the Departmentof Neurosurgery seek a neurosurgeon qualified for appointmentat the Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor rank.The successful candidate will be expected to practice inMorgantown, WV, and may also be expected to perform services atseveral satellite clinical sites in the states of West Virginia,Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia and additional sites to bedetermined based on expansion and growth of our services andsites.The West Virginia University Rockefeller NeuroscienceInstitute, led by Dr. Ali Rezai, is expanding to include theclinical, research, and academic missions of Neurosurgery,Neurology, and Behavioral Medicine and Psychiatry, among others.The Institute will spearhead efforts to develop innovativesolutions for West Virginians and those across the world withneurological and psychiatric conditions ranging from Alzheimer’s toParkinson’s; autism to stroke; and paralysis to chronic pain,addictions, and traumatic brain injury.Duties: The successful candidate will practice in the areas ofneurosurgery. In addition to providing excellent patient care, thesuccessful candidate will also be actively involved in teachingmedical students, residents, and fellows. For appointment at theAssociate Professor or Professor rank, it is expected thatcandidates sustain an outstanding, extramurally supported researchprogram.Qualifications: Applicants must have an MD or DO degree or foreignequivalent and be eligible to obtain an unrestricted West Virginiamedical license. Candidates must be board certified / eligible inneurosurgery. For appointment at the Associate Professor orProfessor rank, a demonstrated track-record of leadership,excellent communication skills, and publications in high-impactjournals are required. All qualifications must be met by the timeof appointment.WVU Medicine is West Virginia University’s affiliated healthsystem, West Virginia’s largest private employer, and a nationalleader in patient safety and quality. The WVU Health System iscomprised of four affiliated hospitals and nine member hospitalsanchored by its flagship hospital, J.W Ruby Memorial Hospital inMorgantown, a 700+ bed academic medical center that offers tertiaryand quaternary care. WVU Medicine has more than 1,000 activemedical staff members and 18,000 employees who serve hundreds ofthousands of people each year from across the state of WestVirginia and the nation.Morgantown, West Virginia is located just over an hour south ofPittsburgh, PA and three hours from Washington, D.C. and Baltimore,MD. Morgantown is consistently rated as one of the best smallmetropolitan areas in the country for both lifestyle and businessclimate. The area offers the cultural diversity and amenities of alarge city in a safe, family-friendly environment. There is also anexcellent school system and an abundance of beautiful homes andrecreational activities.Build your legacy as you serve, teach, learn and make a differencefrom day one. To learn more, please visit http://medicine.hsc.wvu.edu/neurosurgery/and https://neuroscience.wvu.edu/ ,and apply online at http://wvumedicine.org/morgantown.careers.For additional information, please contact Pam Furbee, SeniorPhysician Recruiter & Talent Advisor, [email protected] .West Virginia University & University Health Associates are anAA/EO employer – Minority/Female/Disability/Veteran – and WVU isthe recipient of an NSF ADVANCE award for gender equity. Equal Opportunity Employer/Protected Veterans/Individuals withDisabilities.Please view Equal Employment Opportunity Posters provided byOFCCP here .The contractor will not discharge or in any other mannerdiscriminate against employees or applicants because they haveinquired about, discussed, or disclosed their own pay or the pay ofanother employee or applicant. However, employees who have accessto the compensation information of other employees or applicants asa part of their essential job functions cannot disclose the pay ofother employees or applicants to individuals who do not otherwisehave access to compensation information, unless the disclosure is(a) in response to a formal complaint or charge, (b) in furtheranceof an investigation, proceeding, hearing, or action, including aninvestigation conducted by the employer, or (c) consistent with thecontractor’s legal duty to furnish information. 41 CFR60-1.35(c)
Haley Carney FacebookTwitterCopy LinkEmail TheStatehouseFile.comINDIANAPOLIS— Jóse Goméz Márquez came to America from Peru in 2003, eventually settling in Indiana with the hope of a better life.He soon realized he would need more education to realize his dream. Inspired by his children, Marquez pursued his education through the Next Level Jobs program. He enrolled in a certification program through Ivy Tech Community College that gave him the opportunity to earn free credentials while taking the next steps towards a higher-paying, higher-demanding job in Indiana.Teresa Lubbers, Indiana’s commissioner for Higher Education, cited Marquez as an example of the goals of her department’s strategy to provide opportunities for Hoosiers to improve their skills that lead to better jobs. His was on several stories she cited as she delivered her annual State of Higher Education address Tuesday at the Statehouse.Marquez, she said, completed his certificate in supply chain management and is currently continuing his education as he works toward an associate degree.More than 100 Hoosiers filled an atrium in the Statehouse as Lubbers described the need for change in higher education as the economy evolves and technology advances.She spoke confidently of Indiana’s big goal for at least 60% of Hoosiers to have a quality credential beyond a high school diploma by 2025 and she described three action priorities—completion, equity and talent.“No longer can we assume that completion is tied to a singular credential,” Lubbers said. “The new economy will demand educational upgrades throughout life, and higher education must be more agile and relevant to meet this need.”As for equity, Lubbers said life’s circumstances should not dictate Hoosier’s opportunity to succeed. She believes everyone deserves to have access to higher education opportunities and support.The commission created the nation’s first equity report in order to track results which includes information on socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, along with gender and geography.The third priority of the strategic plan—talent—is measured by Indiana’s College Value Report and focuses on developing human potential to drive the state’s workforce and economy.“Nearly 11,000 Hoosiers are realizing the benefits of skilling up or changing careers by completing a tuition-free, quality credential with a Workforce Ready Grant certificate,” Lubbers told the crowd.The commission has created a “Blueprint for Change” that include strategies to ensure the success of the three action priorities. They include quality, affordability, community engagement, finding the right path for every learner and strengthening the educator pipeline.The measurements include college-going rates, on-time and extended-time completion rates, the completion rates of our adult learners, as well as the progress being to close achievement gaps, she said.Another focus of the commission is to redesign academic programs to include career preparations in all postsecondary programs, including internships, research projects, and work-based learning options that offer career relevance.Lubbers said another goal is to increase median household income to at least the average of Midwestern states, which is $51,635 while Indiana sits at $46,158, according to the Council of State Government Knowledge Center.“The commission’s priorities for the year ahead include helping more students and families understand the benefit of early college credit, and giving high school teachers and counselors better resources to help students navigate their options,” she said.The commission will release an annual report card to track and highlight the progress on the three metrics and explain the stories of people and organizations who are participating in this movement.“Indiana’s willingness to embrace this new higher education compact with a collective sense of urgency and optimism will determine our state’s readiness and prosperity for decades to come,” Lubbers said.FOOTNOTE: Haley Carney is a reporter for TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.
Two weeks ago, the Arizona four-piece Spafford announced an extensive coast-to-coast fall tour spanning through late September to mid-November. Today, in addition to the previously announced 34 shows, Spafford has expanded their tour, adding a five-night Midwest run falling across October 12th through October 17th. The additional shows will take place in Columbus, Ohio; Bloomington, Indiana; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Grand Rapids, Missouri; and Madison, Wisconsin, with the first four locations constituting a Thursday-through-Sunday run. After the Grand Rapids show at The Pyramid Scheme on Sunday, October 15th, Spafford will take a day off before hitting Madison, Wisconsin’s Majestic Theatre on Tuesday, October 17th.These dates come in addition to the existing 34 dates, which will also see Spafford performing two nights at Asheville Music Hall in Asheville, North Carolina, two nights in Denver, Colorado (including a special VIP-only performance), their first headline play at Brooklyn Bowl in Brooklyn, New York, and an appearance at Suwanee Hulaween in Live Oak, Florida.In partnership with CID Entertainment, Spafford is offering their fans an “All In” VIP Experience to those catching their Colorado shows. This limited-run ticket includes admission to the Ogden Theatre on Thursday 11/9, alongside an intimate private VIP-only performance at the new Globe Hall in Denver on Saturday, 11/11. The “All In” VIP Experience also features a Meet & Greet/Photo Opportunity with Spafford, access to the Ogden Theatre soundcheck on 11/9, a limited edition event poster signed by the band, one exclusive Spafford merchandise gift, a high-quality download of soundboard audio from each night, and on-site concert hosts.While the majority of the existing Spafford tour dates are already on sale, starting today, a limited allotment of tickets for the newly announced shows is available via Spafford’s Songkick fan club presale starting at 11 am (local). General on sale for the new Midwest string of shows is this Friday, July 14th at 11 am (local). You can visit the band’s website for additional information on specific dates.Spafford Upcoming Tour Dates7/15 – Patchogue, NY – Great South Bay Music Festival7/30 – Rowayton, CT – RCA Summer Music Series8/3 – 8/5 – Thornville, OH – The Werk Out8/5 – New York, NY – BB Kings8/10 – 8/13 – Scranton, PA – Peach Music Festival9/2 – Chicago, IL – North Coast Music Festival9/9 – Bellvue, CO – Canyon Jam9/21 – 9/23 – Thornville, OH – Resonance Music Festival9/27 – Charlottesville, VA – The Southern9/28 – Baltimore, MD – The 8X109/29 – Philadelphia, PA – The Foundry @ The Fillmore9/30 – Brooklyn, NY – Brooklyn Bowl10/1 – Ithaca, NY – The Haunt10/3 – South Burlington, VT – Higher Ground Showcase Lounge10/4 – Hamden, CT – The Ballroom at The Outer Space10/5 – Northampton, MA – Iron Horse Music Hall10/6 – Cambridge, MA – The Sinclair10/7 – Portland, ME – Port City Music Hall10/8 – Albany, NY – Lucky Strike Social10/11 – State College, PA – State Theatre10/12 – Columbus, OH – A&R Music Bar +Fri. 10/13 – Bloomington, IN – Bluebird Nightclub +Sat. 10/14 – Ann Arbor, MI – Blind Pig +Sun. 10/15 – Grand Rapids, MI – The Pyramid Scheme +Tues. 10/17 – Madison, WI – Majestic Theatre +Thurs. 10/19 – Columbia, MO – Rose Music HallFri. 10/20 – Nashville, TN – Mercy LoungeSat. 10/21 – Asheville, NC – Asheville Music HallSun. 10/22 – Asheville, NC – Asheville Music HallTues. 10/24 – Charlotte, NC – Visulite TheatreWed. 10/25 – Athens, GA – 40 Watt ClubThurs. 10/26 – Live Oak, FL – Suwannee HulaweenFri. 10/27 – Live Oak, FL – Suwannee HulaweenTues. 10/31 – New Orleans, LA – Parish @ House of BluesThurs. 11/2 – Baton Rouge, LA – Spanish MoonFri. 11/3 – Houston, TX – White Oak Music Hall UpstairsSat. 11/4 – Austin, TX – Antone’s Night ClubSun. 11/5 – Dallas, TX – HoB Cambridge RoomTues. 11/7 – Lawrence, KS – The BottleneckWed. 11/8 – Omaha, NE – The Waiting RoomThurs. 11/9 – Denver – CO – Ogden TheatreSat. 11/11 – Denver, CO – Globe Hall *Tues. 11/14 – Seattle, WA – Crocodile CafeWed. 11/15 – Portland, OR – Doug Fir LoungeThurs. 11/16 – San Francisco, CA – The IndependentFri. 11/17 – Los Angeles, CA – Teragram BallroomSat. 11/18 – Flagstaff, AZ – Orpheum Theater