As a veteran of the industry, it also comes down to not preparing the speakers correctly. With academics especially, it is easy for a talk to be a waste of time because they are asked to speak about a region and they talk about their areas of interest that have no pertinence to the audience. I always like to prepare by saying thing a like “what are the three things investors in Ukraine should be looking out for that will determine the length of the war”. It prevents even the best analysts from wandering
0 Anybody who knows the FT smelled 'advertorial' from miles away, even if it didn't say 'advertorial' above the 'article'.
1 For a reminder of the 'quality' of the forecasting of public anaylists, theorists and experts (vs generally smart nobodies who control their ego and will never be on tv) read Philip Tetlock.
2 If you want to bet on analyst opinion, don't throw in your money, bake a cake or something (even though eggs are getting more expensive):
When Does Analyst Reputation Matter? Evidence From Analysts’ Reliance on Management Guidance
3 FGS it's Fordham, one of the most vain posters on LinkedIn (at least Ian Bremmer posts puppy images every now and then. Or something about LEGO - he didn't respond to an image of mine of a LEGO nuclear plant. Oh well...). Just 'follow' her and experience her 'depth': Me on CNN, me on this, me on that. Please, watch me. (Or, for a quicky, just read some FT comments beneath the FT article, they know how to dissect vanity and talking one's book).
Fordham:
'Understanding Geopolitics To Make You a Better Leader and a Happier Person'...
Or:
'How to tie geopolitics to classic US leadership & selfhelp lingo to attract more attendees, especially when it's a female-focussed outlet'
'“Debt is going to stay high and will continue to dampen growth. But fortune favors the well-prepared. The West isn’t over - it became fashionable to talk about the rise of the rest, but the Russian invasion of Ukraine has changed the balance of power, with Europe and the US closely cooperating (…). The big EM countries have not been forced to take position in this balance yet.“It has increased the road to non-Russian sources of energy. Sometimes it takes a crisis to trigger. positive developments.”
“We need to develop our PQ – our political quotient in these times”'
Who wouldn't pay for that?
4 Petro: whether it are the numerous US gov officials who said from the start that they were commited to drain Russia, or the activism of sort-of-liberal-hawks like Casey Michel (The Atlantic 'To avoid more senseless bloodshed, the Kremlin must lose what empire it still retains') the direction of US policy seems pretty clear.
A core point of Petro's reasoning is not a focus on neo liberalism, it's the existence of a significant 'other' UA which is largely omitted from the favoured pov in the west.
Most interesting that even among the academics and well informed that opinions on the War are so sharply divided. Maybe BoA’s audience was looking for a “blob-ish” point view to form the financial framework.
I have been teaching a course on Geo-strategy and, when preparing it, I was shocked by how thin the scholarly literature was on the topic and how much snake-oil is out there. My course took an unexpected spin into being critical of the very concept of geo-politics and what passes for it.
I think my personal professional grip with all things "geo" is that it place emphasis on one independent variable (or category of variables) for all wide and ill-defined range of dependent variables. Call me a positivist but I like to approach the world from the perspective of having something I want to explain and then searching through various rival explanatory variables. Otherwise, one is either a Hedgehog or only possess a hammer (fill in banal cliches).
That said, I studied sanctions and that was a case of looking at a particular type of cause soo I don;t want to be dogmatic...
As a veteran of the industry, it also comes down to not preparing the speakers correctly. With academics especially, it is easy for a talk to be a waste of time because they are asked to speak about a region and they talk about their areas of interest that have no pertinence to the audience. I always like to prepare by saying thing a like “what are the three things investors in Ukraine should be looking out for that will determine the length of the war”. It prevents even the best analysts from wandering
0 Anybody who knows the FT smelled 'advertorial' from miles away, even if it didn't say 'advertorial' above the 'article'.
1 For a reminder of the 'quality' of the forecasting of public anaylists, theorists and experts (vs generally smart nobodies who control their ego and will never be on tv) read Philip Tetlock.
2 If you want to bet on analyst opinion, don't throw in your money, bake a cake or something (even though eggs are getting more expensive):
When Does Analyst Reputation Matter? Evidence From Analysts’ Reliance on Management Guidance
http://bit.ly/41qIk3S
https://klementoninvesting.substack.com/p/star-analysts-think-they-know-better?utm_source=pocket_reader
3 FGS it's Fordham, one of the most vain posters on LinkedIn (at least Ian Bremmer posts puppy images every now and then. Or something about LEGO - he didn't respond to an image of mine of a LEGO nuclear plant. Oh well...). Just 'follow' her and experience her 'depth': Me on CNN, me on this, me on that. Please, watch me. (Or, for a quicky, just read some FT comments beneath the FT article, they know how to dissect vanity and talking one's book).
Fordham:
'Understanding Geopolitics To Make You a Better Leader and a Happier Person'...
Or:
'How to tie geopolitics to classic US leadership & selfhelp lingo to attract more attendees, especially when it's a female-focussed outlet'
https://www.thetroubleclub.com/events/understanding-geopolitics-to-make-you-a-better-leader-and-a-happier-person#:~:text=Understanding%20Geopolitics%20To%20Make%20You%20a%20Better%20Leader%20and%20a%20Happier%20Person
LinkedIn, 6 months ago:
'“Debt is going to stay high and will continue to dampen growth. But fortune favors the well-prepared. The West isn’t over - it became fashionable to talk about the rise of the rest, but the Russian invasion of Ukraine has changed the balance of power, with Europe and the US closely cooperating (…). The big EM countries have not been forced to take position in this balance yet.“It has increased the road to non-Russian sources of energy. Sometimes it takes a crisis to trigger. positive developments.”
“We need to develop our PQ – our political quotient in these times”'
Who wouldn't pay for that?
4 Petro: whether it are the numerous US gov officials who said from the start that they were commited to drain Russia, or the activism of sort-of-liberal-hawks like Casey Michel (The Atlantic 'To avoid more senseless bloodshed, the Kremlin must lose what empire it still retains') the direction of US policy seems pretty clear.
A core point of Petro's reasoning is not a focus on neo liberalism, it's the existence of a significant 'other' UA which is largely omitted from the favoured pov in the west.
http://transatlanticpolicy.com/article/1183/russia-ukraine-and-lasting-peace-in-europe?utm_source=pocket_reader
Here Petro recently with A Lieven of the Quincy Institute on his book:
https://quincyinst.org/event/nicolai-petro-on-the-tragedy-of-ukraine-and-conflict-resolution/
Most interesting that even among the academics and well informed that opinions on the War are so sharply divided. Maybe BoA’s audience was looking for a “blob-ish” point view to form the financial framework.
I have been teaching a course on Geo-strategy and, when preparing it, I was shocked by how thin the scholarly literature was on the topic and how much snake-oil is out there. My course took an unexpected spin into being critical of the very concept of geo-politics and what passes for it.
I think my personal professional grip with all things "geo" is that it place emphasis on one independent variable (or category of variables) for all wide and ill-defined range of dependent variables. Call me a positivist but I like to approach the world from the perspective of having something I want to explain and then searching through various rival explanatory variables. Otherwise, one is either a Hedgehog or only possess a hammer (fill in banal cliches).
That said, I studied sanctions and that was a case of looking at a particular type of cause soo I don;t want to be dogmatic...