____________________________________________________________________________

Your Office Agents are the experts at finding ideal workplace solution worldwide for all sized companies.  The company will work to match you with the best workplace solutions for your physical and virtual office solutions today, while anticipating and planning for your changing needs in the future.  These needs can be executive office suite search, business meeting room rental, workplace recovery solutions, instant offices, facility help or strategic real estate planning.  The service is global and combines the ease of use of a free expedia type search service with the in-depth property analysis of a KPMG type consultancy.  This service is not only unique but it is vital for every company of every size in these uncertain times.

Your Office Agent give you online access to over 3000 Executive Suite Locations, Meeting Rooms and Virtual Addresses and Offices all around the world. They always look to find you the ideal Workspace Solution at lowest  price and see how clients rave about the service a http://www.yourofficeagent.com

Your Office Agent has come up with an innovative way to help companies reduce money and cut cost by looking at alternative workplace strategies to help improve your business.  These strategies range from mobile working, home working, hoteling, coworking, and teleworking to name a few. Your Office Agent are the experts for all your workspace solutions worldwide no matter the challenges you are facing or the opportunities that are coming your way.

Brian Mac Mahon

VP of Provider Services

Your Office Agent

310.933.4666

b.macmahon@yourofficeagent.com

___________________________________________________________________

Ray Lindenberg is a BC/Workspace Industry leader as the Director of Branding at Select Office Suite; Co-founder of the Workspace Association of New York;  author of the upcoming book for industry insiders: “Winning Workspaces: A Guide To The Best And Most Profitable Industry Practices”; and columnist for the Winning Workspaces Q&A Column in the Business Leader Post, with readership in 146 countries.

The Fuzziness of Apparent Transparency

The Misdirection Police are on patrol again. This time, our cross-hairs are zoning in on the use of the term “transparency”, as if apparently practicing it is sufficient to qualify that one is indeed being transparent. Specifically, the debate I’ve joined is whether posting a price on a website or ad is automatically an act of transparency and integrity…and contesting the point that not posting prices is an act of non-transparency or deception.

Many who post prices do so, no doubt, with honorable intentions and truly are in pursuit of demonstrating transparency, which is an ethical act of that serves both the public and the advertiser/business well.

The problem is, some post pricing in an attempt to be purposely non-transparent – an act designed to mislead by B-to-Bs and B-to-Cs, as in: here’s a come-on price to get you through the door…watch out for the bait and switch…or did you read the fine print? This is not always the case, but you must admit, it is common. Posting prices can be more misleading than transparent.

Like I said, many businesses (and hopefully yours) pursue true ethical behavior and transparency when advertised pricing, but what happens when you’re playing in a sandbox where your playmates are using price as a gimmick to funnel in prospects and get their hooks into them before you get your fair chance too? As premier placement, paid advertising and optimizing so you’re above the fold on Google shows – getting to the prospects before your rivals do is the key to sales and marketing gold. But at what price?

How does a consumer know how to wade through and sort out the truly transparent advertisers from the ‘apparent’ transparent ones that are really price-feigning hucksters? They don’t until it’s too late and they’re in the grasp of the apparent transparent-ers. Where is the fairness in this equation. Self-claiming one is transparent, or thinking they’re practicing transparency by simply posting a price, isn’t enough.

In fact, I would argue that in some instances, not posting prices is a greater attempt at transparency, than posting them. When a prospect calls or emails to get pricing because they saw something on an ad or website that sounded appealing and compelling, at that point, verbally or in writing one can really zero in on their needs and quote them a customized, truly transparent price – and not a low-ball, no-frills, come-on ad or web price designed to suck them into the sales funnel.

Furthermore, if they’re calling about a low-ball price that was posted just to snag them, only to find that the price they saw didn’t apply to their usually  more elaborate needs (needs that seemed reasonable to them and that presumed ought to be covered by the posted price), that’s simply an awful way to start up a potential sales discussion and relationship –  a salesperson back-tracking and making excuses as to why the price posted didn’t apply to the prospect making the inquiry.

If you sell goods or services that are not broad in range, and thus fall into a relatively narrow price band , then posting prices is perfectly fine. Same thing if you are a business designed to sell at the lowest price in town, and bargain pricing will make up the bulk of your sales. Post on.

But if you sell goods or services based on value, and have a wide spectrum of offerings and price points, be careful with the way you post your lowest pricing, which to some insinuates standard pricing that they think they can count on for fitting their specific budget. It could backfire – and it definitely doesn’t signal transparency if you’re using low posted pricing as a hook.

Sales, discounts and couponing are a different story. Just make sure to be “transparent” with those specially advertised sales pricing practices so that they are not confused with standard, ongoing pricing. Unfortunately, too many intentionally blur those lines in today’s marketplace, then hide behind the façade of pricing integrity and transparency.

Meanwhile, be careful not underestimate, demonize or dismiss those businesses that don’t post pricing. They might actually turn out to be more transparent and honorable by quoting qualified, precise pricing,  than some practitioners of apparently transparent posted general pricing who are, in fact, being  intentionally fuzzy. Don’t worry…the Misdirection Police are on their tail. 

Read more great information from Ray!

___________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

FCC eyes tax on Internet service

By Brendan Sasso

The Federal Communications Commission is eyeing a proposal to tax broadband Internet service.
The move would funnel money to the Connect America Fund, a subsidy the agency created last year to expand Internet access.

The FCC issued a request for comments on the proposal in April. Dozens of companies and trade associations have weighed in, but the issue has largely flown under the public's radar.

"If members of Congress understood that the FCC is contemplating a broadband tax, they'd sit up and take notice," said Derek Turner, research director for Free Press, a consumer advocacy group that opposes the tax.
Numerous companies, including AT&T, Sprint and even Google have expressed support for the idea.
Consumers already pay a fee on their landline and cellular phone bills to support the FCC's Universal Service Fund. The fund was created to ensure that everyone in the country has access to telephone service, even if they live in remote areas.

Last year, the FCC overhauled a $4.5 billion portion of the Universal Service Fund and converted it into a broadband Internet subsidy, called the Connect America Fund. The new fund aims to subsidize the construction of high-speed Internet networks to the estimated 19 million Americans who currently lack access.

Julius Genachowski, the FCC's chairman, has made expanding broadband access his top priority. He argues that a high-speed Internet connection is critical for succeeding in the 21st century economy and that expanding Internet access is the country's next great infrastructure challenge.

But the money for the new Internet subsidy is still coming from the fees on phone bills.

And in recent years, with more people sending emails instead of making long-distance phone calls, the money flowing into the program has begun to dry up. The Universal Service fee has had to grow to a larger and larger portion of phone bills to compensate.

The FCC floated a number of ideas for reforming the fund's contribution system. In addition to the broadband fee, the commission also sought comments on taxing text messages, as well as levying a flat fee on each phone line, instead of the current system, which is based on a portion of the revenue from interstate phone calls.

The commission only sought input on the ideas and did not indicate whether it planned to move ahead with any of them, including the broadband fee.

When the FCC released its proposal, Genachowski issued a statement saying the current contribution system is outdated and full of loopholes.

"Today we propose three goals for contribution reform: efficiency, fairness, and sustainability," Genachowski said. "And we underscore that any reforms to the contribution system must safeguard core Commission objectives, including the promotion of broadband innovation, investment, and adoption."

In its filing, Google argued that the evidence "strongly supports expanding the [Universal Service Fund] contribution base to include broadband Internet access services."

According to Google, taxing broadband service is preferable to taxing the kinds of online services it offers, like email or Google Voice.

"Saddling these offerings with new, direct USF contribution obligations is likely to restrict innovative options for all communications consumers and cause immediate and lasting harm to the users, pioneers, and innovators of Internet-based services," Google argued.

But Turner argued that imposing a fee on broadband access, even if it is only a dollar or two, would discourage many people from buying the service—the exact opposite outcome of what the FCC is trying to achieve.

"For folks who are thinking about adopting broadband, who have much lower incomes or don't value broadband as much—that extra dollar on the margins will cause millions of people... to not adopt," Turner said.

The FCC could run into legal problems with the Internet Tax Freedom Act, a 1998 law that bans the government from taxing Internet access. But the FCC has long argued that Universal Service is a fee that the providers choose to pass on to consumers and not a tax.

Turner said it is unlikely that the FCC will make any controversial moves before November's election.

"I don't anticipate that the chairman would move to adopt a drastic overhaul ahead of the election," he said.

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/245479-fcc-eyes-tax-on-internet-service

More great information from Ray....

The Fuzziness of Apparent Transparency

The Misdirection Police are on patrol again. This time, our cross-hairs are zoning in on the use of the term “transparency”, as if apparently practicing it is sufficient to qualify that one is indeed being transparent. Specifically, the debate I’ve joined is whether posting a price on a website or ad is automatically an act of transparency and integrity…and contesting the point that not posting prices is an act of non-transparency or deception.

Many who post prices do so, no doubt, with honorable intentions and truly are in pursuit of demonstrating transparency, which is an ethical act of that serves both the public and the advertiser/business well.

The problem is, some post pricing in an attempt to be purposely non-transparent – an act designed to mislead by B-to-Bs and B-to-Cs, as in: here’s a come-on price to get you through the door…watch out for the bait and switch…or did you read the fine print? This is not always the case, but you must admit, it is common. Posting prices can be more misleading than transparent.

Like I said, many businesses (and hopefully yours) pursue true ethical behavior and transparency when advertised pricing, but what happens when you’re playing in a sandbox where your playmates are using price as a gimmick to funnel in prospects and get their hooks into them before you get your fair chance too? As premier placement, paid advertising and optimizing so you’re above the fold on Google shows – getting to the prospects before your rivals do is the key to sales and marketing gold. But at what price?

How does a consumer know how to wade through and sort out the truly transparent advertisers from the ‘apparent’ transparent ones that are really price-feigning hucksters? They don’t until it’s too late and they’re in the grasp of the apparent transparent-ers. Where is the fairness in this equation. Self-claiming one is transparent, or thinking they’re practicing transparency by simply posting a price, isn’t enough.

In fact, I would argue that in some instances, not posting prices is a greater attempt at transparency, than posting them. When a prospect calls or emails to get pricing because they saw something on an ad or website that sounded appealing and compelling, at that point, verbally or in writing one can really zero in on their needs and quote them a customized, truly transparent price – and not a low-ball, no-frills, come-on ad or web price designed to suck them into the sales funnel.

Furthermore, if they’re calling about a low-ball price that was posted just to snag them, only to find that the price they saw didn’t apply to their usually  more elaborate needs (needs that seemed reasonable to them and that presumed ought to be covered by the posted price), that’s simply an awful way to start up a potential sales discussion and relationship –  a salesperson back-tracking and making excuses as to why the price posted didn’t apply to the prospect making the inquiry.

If you sell goods or services that are not broad in range, and thus fall into a relatively narrow price band , then posting prices is perfectly fine. Same thing if you are a business designed to sell at the lowest price in town, and bargain pricing will make up the bulk of your sales. Post on.

But if you sell goods or services based on value, and have a wide spectrum of offerings and price points, be careful with the way you post your lowest pricing, which to some insinuates standard pricing that they think they can count on for fitting their specific budget. It could backfire – and it definitely doesn’t signal transparency if you’re using low posted pricing as a hook.

Sales, discounts and couponing are a different story. Just make sure to be “transparent” with those specially advertised sales pricing practices so that they are not confused with standard, ongoing pricing. Unfortunately, too many intentionally blur those lines in today’s marketplace, then hide behind the façade of pricing integrity and transparency.

Meanwhile, be careful not underestimate, demonize or dismiss those businesses that don’t post pricing. They might actually turn out to be more transparent and honorable by quoting qualified, precise pricing,  than some practitioners of apparently transparent posted general pricing who are, in fact, being  intentionally fuzzy. Don’t worry…the Misdirection Police are on their tail.

Ray Lindenberg is a BC/Workspace Industry leader as the Director of Branding at Select Office Suite; Co-founder of the Workspace Association of New York;  author of the upcoming book for industry insiders: “Winning Workspaces: A Guide To The Best And Most Profitable Industry Practices”; and columnist for the Winning Workspaces Q&A Column in the Business Leader Post, with readership in 146 countries. Here’s the link to the weekly column: http://www.businessleaderpost.com/category/qa-columns/winning-workspaces-qa/

__________________________________________________________________________________

Announcing The BioScience Center

One of New Mexico’s premier leaders in bioscience and pharmaceuticals, Dr. Stuart Rose, announces the opening of The BioScience Center – the first incubator in our state where entrepreneurs and start-up companies in biotechnology and related fields will find office and wet laboratory space suitable for the development of their businesses. A serial and global entrepreneur himself, Dr. Rose is interested in creating an environment at the Center that cultivates training for first-time entrepreneurs and collaboration with experienced entrepreneurs in fields of biotechnology. Dr. Rose says “The philosophy of the Center will be to provide assistance to entrepreneurs who may lack specific resources that we might have or that we can find for them.”

The facility is perfectly located near Uptown, has 40 offices and six laboratories available for build-out and/or rent, shared resources such as internet and phone, and program development underway to provide tenants access to academic libraries, marketing information, networking solutions and funding resources to create viable business ventures.

Joining in this endeavor as Director of the Center is Lisa J. Adkins, who also serves as Chairwoman of the New Mexico Technology Council and co-owns two businesses of her own. “We look forward to community outreach efforts and creating an environment for technology businesses in NM to drive innovation, grow and succeed.”

The BioScience Center is located at 5901 Indian School Road, NE, Albuquerque, NM 87110. For more information or to tour the facility, contact Ms. Adkins at 505-463-5077 or lisa@thebiosciencecenter.com.