Nov 082014
 



Kevin O’Leary, the entrepreneur and fund manager also known as “Mr. Wonderful” on ABC’s (DIS) “Shark Tank” dropped by Yahoo studios to talk about the show, venture investing and his favorite topic – money. For those of you who don’t know, “Shark Tank” is a reality series that features aspiring entrepreneurs making business presentations to a panel of potential investors. O’Leary sits in prime position and is known for his no-holds-barred, blunt, brutal approach as he quizzes entrepreneurs about the financial viability of their ideas.

“People find that hard sometimes, but my attitude about money is it’s binary – black and white. Either you make it or you lose it,” he explains. “So why lie to people about it, particularly if they are putting their own families’ assets in harm’s way, which is often the case on Shark Tank? I’d rather just say it’s a stupid idea; it’s going to zero; take it behind the barn and shoot it.”

Money bundles dollar stack rih success small

O’Leary breaks down the secret to success on “Shark Tank” to these three elements:

1. Easy-to-explain ideas: The entrepreneur or team must be able to articulate their idea in 60 seconds or less, says O’Leary. A pitch must be very simple for the investor to understand. On Season 3, artist Steve Gadlin’s entire e-mail to apply for “Shark Tank” consisted of a whopping two sentences. “I draw stick-figure pictures of cats and sell them for ten bucks a piece… let me at ‘em.” He was looking for a $10,000 investment for a 25% stake in his “business.” The idea may have seemed simplistic, but Gadlin sold the sharks on the concept that he could whip out 25 customized cat drawings in an hour. He ended up with $25,000 for 33%.

2. Leadership and Teamwork: You have to be able to explain why you’re the only person or at least the right person to execute your business plan, explains O’Leary. On an episode of “Shark Tank” that aired in April, New York City firefighter Sal DePaola and his two business partners, who are also firefighters, appeared on the show to pitch their product – The Paint Brush Cover. The product prevents brushes from drying out when the painter goes on a break. The three had owned a painting business and so were able to articulate the process of inventing, producing and selling The Paint Brush Cover. They went in looking for $50,000 for a 10% stake. They walked out with a deal – $200,000 for 20% and a tie-up with QVC.

3. Numbers: “This is probably the most consistent thing that you find: [winners] knew their numbers,” explains O’Leary. “If you put all three together, you get the alchemy that gets the sharks interested in writing a check. If you miss out on any of those, we’ll throw you out in the street,” he says.

[Get the Latest Market Data and News with the Yahoo Finance App]

In season 6, inventors Alice Brooks and Bettina Chen pitched a building toy for girls called “Roominate.” Both met at Stanford University and have multiple engineering degrees. The company had already received $85,000 of KickStarter funding, had $1.7 million in sales and a retail presence. They walked out with half a million dollars for a 5% equity stake.

The world of venture investing is a tough one, explains O’Leary. Of every ten deals, two fail, six end up coasting and the last two are hits – and end up providing all the returns, he says. The only exception, however, to that principle is “Shark Tank”. O’Leary says that no matter what the product or idea is, it usually ends up being somewhat successful just by virtue of being featured on the show. Tally up the millions of dollars in free advertising from being prime time, the reruns and the follow-ups and he finds 30 to 40% of outcomes are successful.

One final piece of advice? “The truth is don’t cry for money because it never cries for you,” he says.

Nov 242013
 
Faust's dream vision
Your parents are intelligent, well educated people. You don’t understand why they believe in what their religion teaches. Are they hypocrites? What makes them to believe?

This article will help you to feel more relieved when you understand what makes billions of people to believe in myths and follow religions. You are not alone in your search for the answers. Use the share and bookmarking buttons to help others to find this article.

    “Because this theory can be tested scientifically, we can  learn its strengths and weaknesses, and gradually improve it,” Reiss said. “Eventually, we may understand better the psychological basis of religion.”

 

16 basic desires :

Power, independence, curiosity, acceptance, order, saving, honor, idealism, social contact, family, status, vengeance, romance, eating, physical exercise, and tranquility.

 

People are not drawn to religion just because of a fear of death or any other single reason, according to a new comprehensive, psychological theory of religion.

There are actually 16 basic human psychological needs that motivate people to seek meaning through religion, said Steven Reiss, author of the new theory and professor of psychology and psychiatry at Ohio State University.

These basic human needs – which include honor, idealism, curiosity and acceptance – can explain why certain people are attracted to religion, why God images express psychologically opposite qualities, and the relationship between personality and religious experiences.

Previous psychologists tried to explain religion in terms of just one or two overarching psychological needs. The most common reason they cite is that people embrace religion because of a fear of death, as expressed in the saying ‘there are no atheists in foxholes,” Reiss said.

Luis Ricardo Falero, Public Domain

Luis Ricardo Falero, Public Domain

“But religion is multi-faceted – it can’t be reduced to just one or two desires.”

Reiss described his new theory – which he said may be the most comprehensive psychological theory of religion since Freud’s work more than a century ago — in the June issue of Zygon, a journal devoted to issues of science and religion.

“I don’t think there has been a comprehensive theory of religion that was scientifically testable,” he said.

The theory is based on his overall theory of human motivation, which he calls sensitivity theory. Sensitivity theory is explained in his 2000 book Who Am I? The 16 Basic Desires that Motivate Our Action and Define Our Personalities(Tarcher Putnam).

 

Reiss said that each of the 16 basic desires outlined in the book influence the psychological appeal of religious behavior. The desires are power, independence, curiosity, acceptance, order, saving, honor, idealism, social contact, family, status, vengeance, romance, eating, physical exercise, and tranquility.

In fact, Reiss has already done some initial research that suggests the desire for independence is a key psychological desire that separates religious and non-religious people. In a study published in 2000, Reiss found that religious people (the study included mostly Christians) expressed a strong desire for interdependence with others. Those who were not religious, however, showed a stronger need to be self-reliant and independent.

The study also showed that religious people valued honor more than non-religious people, which Reiss said suggests many people embrace religion to show loyalty to parents and ancestors.

In the Zygon paper, Reiss explains that every religious person balances their 16 basic human needs to fit their own personality.

“They embrace those aspects of religious imagery that express their strongest psychological needs and deepest personal values.”

One example is the desire for curiosity, Reiss said. Religious intellectuals, who are high in curiosity, value a God who is knowable through reason, while doers, who have weak curiosity, may value a God that is knowable only through revelation.

“People who have a strong need for order should enjoy ritualized religious experiences, whereas those with a weak need for order may prefer more spontaneous expression of faith,” he said.

“The prophecy that the weak will inherit the earth should appeal especially to people with a weak need for status, whereas the teaching that everybody is equal before God should appeal especially to people with a strong need for idealism.”

If religion and personality are linked, religion must provide a range of images and symbols sufficiently diverse to appeal to all the different kinds of personalities in the human population, Reiss says. Religious imagery potentially accommodates everybody because in many instances the images and symbols are psychological opposites.

“How we value and balance the 16 psychological needs is what makes us an individual, and for every individual there are appealing religious images,” he said.

“The values that guide a personality with a strong need for vindication are expressed by a God of wrath, or a war God, while the values that guide a personality with a weak need for vindication are expressed by a God of forgiveness.”

“The values that guide a personality with a strong need to socialize are expressed by religious fellowship and festivals, while the values that guide a personality with a weak need to socialize are expressed by religious asceticism.”

The need for acceptance makes meaningful images of God as a savior, while its opposite inspires the concept of original sin, according to Reiss. The need to eat motives some people to value abstinence and others to value sustenance.

“Because this theory can be tested scientifically, we can learn its strengths and weaknesses, and gradually improve it,” Reiss said. “Eventually, we may understand better the psychological basis of religion.”

Reiss emphasized that the theory addresses the psychology of religious experiences and has no implications for the validity or invalidity of religious beliefs.

You may get a clearer picture and peace of mind after you read other books from this author. There are links provided on the web page to buy the books from Amazon.

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license.Creative Commons License

NEW THEORY SUGGESTS PEOPLE ARE ATTRACTED TO RELIGION FOR 16 REASONS by Jeff Grabmeier is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/religdes.htm.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://beyondpenguins.ehe.osu.edu/terms-of-use.