A few nice business plan example images I found:
University of Maryland President Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., and Dr. Ray O. Johnson, Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer of Lockheed Martin after signing the Memorandum of Understanding.
Image by University of Maryland Press Releases
Online Release - www.newsdesk.umd.edu/uniini/release.cfm?ArticleID=2171
UM and Lockheed Martin Launch Strategic Relationship
COLLEGE PARK, Md. - The University of Maryland and Lockheed Martin Corporation opened a major new chapter in their more than 60-year history today (June 4, 2010) when Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., President of the University, and Dr. Ray O Johnson, Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer of Lockheed Martin, agreed to create a unique, strategic relationship between the two institutions.
The new agreement provides a strategic framework for current and future cooperation that leverages the resources, talent, and ideas of both institutions to produce innovative solutions for global and national security challenges. The agreement provides for work in three key areas: Centers of Collaboration, Joint Pursuit of Business Opportunities, and Enhanced Research and Development. The initial Lockheed Martin commitment is a minimum of million per year for three years. However, officials from both organizations agree that the relationship is expected to grow in terms of both collaboration and investment.
The University of Maryland's Patrick O'Shea, professor and chair of the department of electrical and computer engineering, will oversee the strategic relationship created by agreement.
"The University of Maryland is thrilled to be formalizing our long-term partnership with Lockheed Martin Corporation. Our combined strength will provide capacity for innovation needed to respond to complex global issues and national security challenges," said President Mote, who is the Glenn L. Martin Institute Professor of Engineering. "Our partnership will allow us to undertake major projects benefiting our national prosperity and security."
"Lockheed Martin's strategic relationship with the University of Maryland leverages the best talent and ideas from both institutions to produce innovative solutions for our future," said Dr. Johnson. "This partnership represents Lockheed Martin's commitment to its community and future workforce, and it represents a strategic business partnership that demonstrates the power of collaboration between industry, academia, and the government."
------------------------------------------------------
Gansler on the power of strategic alliances;
"These kinds of strategic alliances may significantly reduce the time needed to bring new technologies into use. They promise to shorten the pipeline...."
- Jacques Gansler
------------------------------------------------------
Centers of Collaboration - Officials say a key part of the new strategic relationship is the creation of Centers of Collaboration, which will support sustained cooperative work in mutually agreed-upon areas - initially logistics and sustainment, climate change, and cyber-security. The first of these, the Center for Logistics and Sustainment, has already been launched under the direction of Maryland's Jacques Gansler, who is the first holder of the university's Roger C. Lipitz Chair in Public Policy and Private Enterprise and a former Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics in the Clinton Administration.
Joint Pursuit of Business Opportunities - Another focus of the new strategic relationship is to capitalize on their combined ability to optimize resource use and complementary strengths and capabilities to respond successfully to federal agency and other third-party needs for products and services.
Enhanced Research and Development - Lockheed Martin already supports research at the University of Maryland in a number of areas, such as in work on laser plasma filaments that can enhance multiple applications of high-power laser beams and research in cultural modeling that can help troops perform better in unfamiliar environments. Through their new strategic relationship, the two organizations plan to enhance and expand their existing robust R&D relationship with more efficient use of facilities, processes, and people and to explore an overarching agreement governing all research projects.
A Long History Together
In 1944, in commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of Engineering at Maryland, Martin made a gift of .7 million (current endowment value .4 million) to the university to establish instruction and research in the aeronautical sciences. A second gift of 0,000, named in honor of Martin's mother, Minta Martin, was made the following year. Today this endowment is a major source of research funding for faculty, staff, and students in the A. James Clark School of Engineering.
The state of Maryland, in support of Martin's vision, appropriated funds in the late 1940s to construct four new buildings at the university: the Glenn L. Martin Wind Tunnel building, Glenn L. Martin Hall, the Engineering Laboratory building and the Physics building. In 1949, a newly formed Department of Aeronautical Engineering (later renamed Aerospace Engineering) began providing full-time instruction in the aeronautical sciences. Martin Aircraft hired the university's very first master's graduate in aeronautical sciences, Mr. Dale Scott. Over the years, Martin Aircraft and it successors, Martin Marietta and Lockheed Martin, have hired many thousands more University of Maryland graduates in engineering, physics, computer science, business, and other disciplines.
"This powerful relationship, first established between the university and Glenn L. Martin, and carried forward with Lockheed Martin, has been in place for over 60 years, and it represents one of the most historically significant relationships between a university and a corporation in the United States," said Darryll Pines, dean of the university's A. James Clark School of Engineering. "Since those early days, the relationship between Lockheed Martin and the University has grown in many ways. For example, the Martin or Lockheed Martin name is associated with numerous prestigious awards, medals, and professorships that are given out to faculty, students, and alumni of the university, as well as to named spaces such as two Lockheed Martin classrooms in the university's Computer Science Instructional Center building."
Numerous Lockheed Martin senior executives have contributed significantly to the vision and prestige of the university by serving as members on various university boards, including: Robert J. Stevens, Chairman and CEO of Lockheed Martin; Norman Augustine, former Lockheed Martin CEO and President; Chris Kubasik, President and Chief Operating Officer of Lockheed Martin; Linda Gooden, Executive Vice President of Information Systems and Global Solutions; and Dr. Ray O Johnson, Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer.
Lockheed Martin
Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin is a global security company that employs about 136,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The Corporation reported 2009 sales of .2 billion.
University of Maryland
The University of Maryland is the state's flagship university and one of the nation's preeminent public research universities. Ranked No. 18 among public universities by U.S. News & World Report, it has 28 academic programs in the U.S News Top 10 and 78 in the Top 25. The Institute of Higher Education (Jiao Tong University, Shanghai), which ranks the world's top universities based on research, puts Maryland at No. 37 in the world and No. 12 among U.S. public universities. The university has produced six Nobel laureates, seven Pulitzer Prize winners, more than 40 members of the national academies and scores of Fulbright scholars. The university is recognized for its diversity, with underrepresented students comprising one-third of the student population. For more information about the University of Maryland, visit www.umd.edu.
MEDIA CONTACTS:
University of Maryland, Lee Tune, 301-405-4679
Lockheed Martin, Thad Madden, 301-897-6833, thad.madden@lmco.com
Contemporary Urban Development, Economic Incentive, and the Fate of Regional Modernism in Atlanta, Georgia
Image by jon_buono
© Jon Buono 2008 All rights reserved
Click "original size" for legible image
Underlying any characterization of a national or regional architecture rests the mechanism of its associated economy. Following World War II in the United States, large and yet targeted government funding initiatives to support infrastructure, home ownership, education, and industry culminated to build and empower a growing middle class. The federal nature of these initiatives assured their widespread, albeit varied, application throughout the country, while their pervasiveness grew to influence all facets of the consumer economy. Today, the conservation of U.S. architecture and landscapes from this postwar era is similarly affected by national, if not global, economic conditions. However, the economic value of historic resources is rarely addressed in regulatory requirements for identification, or the motives for public-led advocacy. To strengthen the evaluation of resources possessing primarily regional significance, this poster suggests the consideration of both historic and contemporary economic contexts.
As has been well documented, the immediate postwar period in the United States was defined by unprecedented economic growth. Although it took ten years for the country to regain its pre-1929 gross domestic product (GDP), by the end of 1950 this value had tripled in size. In the ten-year period from 1940-1950, housing starts increased annually and more than tripled between 1945 and 1946 as the end of the war was in sight. In the same period, personal expenditures for consumption more than doubled, while domestic investment nearly quadrupled. These rates of growth have not been repeated in the U.S. to date.
The period is also defined by the emergence of new regional economic dynamics when “younger” states in the South and West grew at faster rates than established east-coast economies. For example prior to WWII, per capita income for California was approximately half of that for New York; by the early 1960s the western state had surpassed its east coast rival. Although less substantial, in the period from 1940-1960, per capita income in Georgia grew 500% versus 320% in New York. This poster illustrates case studies from the city of Atlanta, which in this period developed as the cosmopolitan centre for business, education, and transportation in the Southeast.
Within U.S. metropolitan areas such as Atlanta, protection of cultural resources is primarily controlled by local legislation. Although some protective designations and easements are determined by state and federal agencies, resources under this control account for a significantly small quantity of the total resources potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. In Atlanta, no resources constructed after 1937 have been designated as landmarks.
The value of conserving of Modern Movement sites and buildings possessing regional significance has been overshadowed by a larger pre-occupation with “masterworks” defined by pre-existing scholarship. Continuing this trend would suggest a “trickle-down” effect for “lesser” resource documentation and conservation; however the recent rapidity of the U.S. real-estate market and the national resurgence in urban centres has not supported this evolution. In order to challenge these unique market factors, the advocacy of local constituents must at the onset promote alternatives to proposals for land and building redevelopment.
In 2001, Atlanta was rated the thirty-fifth largest city in the United States, but the eleventh largest metropolitan area with the eleventh highest growth rate. The current pattern of growth distribution evidences the city’s aggressive 1952 annexation to stem its decreasing urban tax base. But despite this legislation and other earlier regional planning initiatives, Atlanta’s growth from the post-WWII period until today has been primarily lead by the interests of private development.
The Atlanta metropolitan region represents the Modern distinction of the urban core from the inner and outer suburbs. As is typical, today’s inner-ring suburbs are characterized by their postwar development, their dependence on aging infrastructure, and their need for reinvestment. Plans for “restorative” development, which typically involve wholesale demolition and site clearance, are often blindly praised as solutions to congestion, high taxes, crime, and the notorious “blight”. However, the limited appreciation of the inner ring as merely parcels convenient to the urban core and ripe for densification ignores the opportunities to integrate their historic fabric into the larger metropolitan context.
In the United States economic system, the success of the historic preservation and conservation movement has relied on the continual exploration, demonstration, and activation of financial incentives. They have ranged from the explicit (legislated tax rebates) to the implicit (life-cycle analysis of historic materials). Today, the dominant paradigm of America’s building practice is conservation- so much so that within the past decade the relationship of environmental responsibility to fiscal incentive has established the terms of a conservation marketplace. The shift is represented by the popular embrace of the “triple bottom line”, as defined by energy expert John Elkington to include people, planet, and profitability. This new focus underlies the success of the Green building movement, which has lead to the certification of over one thousand buildings by the U.S. Green Building Council, with thousands waiting in application.
Ironically, this movement has not been widely associated with the benefits of architectural conservation and rehabilitation. It has fostered a checklist approach to architecture, which in the words of architect Travis Price has resulted in a process “more engineering than architecture”, and diminishes the value of embodied material energy present in existing modern buildings relative to the operational efficiencies of new construction. This bias has favoured the behaviour of American architectural design as it relates to real estate development by private interests, which has historically measured value (and by extension financial risk) in the rational terms of cost per square foot. Ultimately, the increased importance of economic and environmental metrics to urban development suggests an amended method for the evaluation of Modern architectural resources. As so-called functional obsolescence continues to justify the widespread demolition of postwar resources, it is imperative that the traditional “art historical” criteria of significance be supplemented by a more scientific resource assessment including the impacts of embodied energy, reconstruction versus replacement cost estimating, and construction waste reduction.
Jokes For Votes
Image by DawnOne
Jokes For Votes
Palin on SNL, McCain trips up
www.theage.com.au/world/us-election-2008/mccain-goes-for-...
palinmccainbubblesxsm
NEWS
"Sarah Palin's Alaska." is to be aired on "VERGE- Planet Green's all-new primetime programming destination"
WRITE DISCOVERY CHANNEL AN EMAIL about it!
For example, I wrote-
You seriously intend giving Sarah Palin money to host a show on VERGE- Planet Green? So she can further her plan to influence American public opinion with her inane but ultimately dangerous views on ecology?
Please... reconsider airing "Sarah Palin's Alaska." Be assured I WILL NOT WATCH IT, and will urge all my friends to do likewise. I will also be less likely to turn on your channel in the future if this is the kind of programming you intend to pursue in your new line-up.
Sincerely,
(ME)
3 contacts to Send to directly -
Contact 1- Chris Finnegan
Planet Green
VP, Communications
chris_finnegan@discovery.com
240.662.7589
Contact 2- Discovery's Investor Relations department, please call (212) 548-5882 or toll-free (877) 324-5850, or email investor_relations@discovery.com
Contact 3- Peter Liguori Chief Operating Officer
COO@discovery.com
WHO IS (big surprise...) Peter Liguori was previously FOX network senior vice president, marketing
AND SAID THIS!
The eight-episode travelogue will “reveal Alaska’s powerful beauty as it has never been filmed, and as told by one of the state’s proudest daughters,” Peter Liguori, Discovery’s chief operating officer, said in a statement.
mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/tlc-acquires-sa...
Peter Liguori Chief Operating Officer Discovery Communications
Peter Liguori is a key member of Discovery Communications' senior executive team, providing leadership and vision for the company's operational organizations, including Marketing, Discovery Studios, Corporate Communications and Corporate Affairs, Business Affairs, and Media Technology, Production and Operations, as well as playing a key role in corporate budget and business decisions.
In addition to his operational role, Liguori chairs Discovery's Content Committee comprised of U.S. Networks general managers with a focus on maximizing the value of the company's marketing resources, network portfolio and overall corporate assets.
Liguori joined Fox / Liberty Networks in 1996 as senior vice president, marketing, for a new joint venture, which now includes Fox Sports Net, FX, Fox Sports World, SPEED and National Geographic Channel. Prior to joining Fox, Liguori was vice president, consumer marketing, at HBO. Prior to HBO, he worked in advertising at Ogilvy & Mather and Saatchi & Saatchi. He is a graduate cum laude of Yale University.
mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/peter-liguori-t...
