One of the things I appreciate about iTunes is the fields you can use to add extra tags to your songs.

As we discussed earlier most people use Genre as their default sorting system, but that is just tapping the surface of what you could get out of your music collection. If you have an extensive library, it would be worth your while to ‘polish’ these song tags so that you can create some great play-lists. Here are some essential tags you might want to consider using:

• Date – Should be the date of the song’s release, not the date of the album release. This is especially important when it comes to greatest hit compilations. Having the correct date allows you to listen to an artist’s evolution as a musician.
• Location – I put this in the Grouping header. I put the city, state/province, and country that the artists/band was born/formed in. Having a location can allow me to listen to bands from California or from Scotland.
• Other Info such as Member of XXX Band – I put this in the Comments header. When I do a search for the Police, I will also see my albums by Sting, Andy Summers, and Stewart Copeland. Again, it allows me to listen to an artist evolve as a musician.

Do you see what this creates? It becomes possible to sort music in a new way. You can create a play-list of your Australian Rock Bands from the 1980s. You will see new trends develop and your music will become more interesting.

Where do you find this information? My favorite site for this kind of information is AllMusic.com. Check it out.

Okay, we have imported, rated, and ran statistics on iTunes. But as your library gets bigger, it becomes more and more difficult to find artists and songs. Thankfully, iTunes uses the Music Genre as its basic sorting system which makes it easier to find the style of music you want to listen to.

Default Music Genres include: Classical, R&B, Rock, Jazz, etc. These are fine if you have 40-50 artists from diverse musical backgrounds, but what happens if you listen primarily to one genre of music? What do you do if you are a serious collector and listener of music and are frustrated with the standard labels? What do you do when you have over 100 artists and 10,000 songs? This blog post is meant to address that challenge.

To start with there are have been three approaches to what a Music Genre is:

1) People Ignore It. Some people say that Musical Genres are too presumptuous of a field to use. They are indignant that the label  ‘pigeon holes’ artists unfairly. That is partially true. Led Zeppelin is considered to be the earliest hard rock/metal band even though they played some folk inspired music. Are they British-Blues? Hard Rock? Something else? Some people will give up and just ignore the use of Music Genres which is to lose out on the benefits of having a proper sorting system. The fact is that Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd have more in common with each other than Louis Armstrong means that these similarities and differences should not be ignored. A label such as Music Genre is a tool, an imperfect one, but a necessary one to help you enjoy your music.

2) People Simplify It. For example, there has been past (failed) attempts to create a unified Genre Tree. The hope is that by finding the links between the different Music Genres we would then decide how to label a particular artist. Its a noble goal, but one that will never work because it operates on the mistaken assumption that Music Genres are linear things. It is the conventional wisdom that the Blues created Jazz which created R&B which created Rock & Roll which created Rock. Its nice and tidy, but makes a fundamental error of judgment.

While Artists and Music Genres do influence each other, this does not mean that one creates the other. Music Genres are very dynamic. We will find Artists influencing each other almost immediately. It happens too fast to say that there is a single lineage that all music comes from.  Instead, it seems more reasonable to think of Musical Genres as evolving alongside each other. This kind of thinking is what we find in Convergent Evolution, where species can evolve similar traits despite not being directly related as we see with the appearance of wings amongst birds and bats. We see the same thing in Music Genres with Traditional, Art, and Popular music forms all developing  independently in each nation. There is no evidence that a single nation gave all of the music traditions to the rest of the world.

3) People Confuse It. Some people think that a Music Genre is the same thing as the mood of the music. They believe that Chill Music is a Music Genre. Sorry, but it isn’t. Its a style that can be found across multiple Genres such as Jazz, Pop, Rock,  and Electronica. ‘Break-up songs’ and ‘Love songs’ are also not Genres. While mood or song intent is important, it is not the same as a Music Genre. That will be a topic for a future blog post.

Another pet peeve of mine is when Genres are labeled with biased terms like “Classic Rock” or “Contemporary Pop”. Who decides if something is classic or not? The word ‘contemporary’ is just as problematic. When Bing Crosby performed in the 1930s it was considered to be contemporary at that time. Yet now we call it Classic Pop making the term ‘Conteporary’ too relative to be helpful. Labels should be accurate and objective enough that they stand for something.

So what is proper way to work with Music Genres? Let’s start with a definition I came up with: “A Musical Genre is a combination of historical and social conditions that dynamically influences a collective musical interpretation of the world.”

My point is to stop thinking of Music Genre as a static, catch-all term to slot artists and bands into. Its an error I originally made as I started working with the concept of Music Genre. I have since discovered that instead we should think of Music Genre as a world view shared by a collective of artists. It is about how they make sense of what is happening around them. For example, the African American experience in the American South show at least two different ways of understanding life though music. The first was Gospel music and the second was the Blues. One was religious and the other was secular and each provided different interpretations about how life was treating them. The same can be same of Rock music in the late 1960s, where we see artists interpret life in different ways through heavy metal (Black Sabbath), power-pop (The Who), and progressive rock (Pink Floyd). All were British bands, but with very different ways of looking at and interpreting life.

Music Genres are dynamic. They are born and die, and sometimes are reborn. New ones are being created all of the time because life and society is dynamic and always changing. So, what should you label your genres? Whatever you want. Its your collection, but allow me to to suggest a Music Genre system based on the excellent resource at AllMusic.com:

List of AllMusic.com’s Music Genres

AllMusic.com not only possesses an extensive list of Genres, but also breaks them down into descriptive Sub-Genres. I use the Sub-Genres to create my own Music Genre labels for iTunes. Instead of iTunes standard labels of “Rock” or “Alternative and Punk”, I adopted  labels such as: “Rock: Mainstream”, “Rock: Punk”, “Rock: Metal”, etc.  Jazz music would  have labels like “Jazz: Dixie”, “Jazz: Swing”, “Jazz: Big Band”, etc. The Sub-Genres becomes a way to capture distinct eras of a Music Genre. My early 1960s British bands would be labeled “Rock: British Invasion”; while my 1970s bands that looked like hippies and preached peace would be my “Rock: Folk” bands.

Since I personally have very few Jazz or Blues artists, I don’t have any Sub-Genres for those artists. The dynamic is that the more artists of a particular Music Genre I collect, the more Sub-Genres I will need to better organize them. As soon as I start collecting 20+ artists of a particular Music Genre, I will employ Sub-Genres labels as a way to better organize my music library. Listening to more artists expands my musical tastes and knowledge which is captured in a more diverse list of Music Genres in iTunes.

Finally, there is no right way to label your music in iTunes. Its flexibility allows you to create as many different labels you want, but to be useful, your system should have just enough detail to allow you to find what is the same and what is different between your artists and songs. The purpose of iTunes’s Music Genre is one of utility, not about being right.

The game is called Cyber Circuit and more information can be found here and here.

Congratulations to Complex Games on announcing the release of their second game.

This next post is not as much a lesson as a confessional. Did you know you can combine music and statistics? iTunes has so many labels and tags that can be added to your music and the database that it is possible to evaluate this music with statistics. (Whatever that can be labeled can be measured and whatever that can be measured can be tracked with statistics).

I am a huge statistical geek (an obscure soccer league, political elections, band ratings, etc) so the idea of analyzing the music I listen to in new ways is like combining peanut butter and chocolate.

First of all here is the best page with links to great software that can help analyze your iTunes library. It is located at TuneQuest. Check it out…

I have tried two different programs. The most polished one is called SuperAnalzyer and it is pretty super. It creates some wonderful statistics and graphs.

SuperAnalzyer PDF Document

The other program is not listed on that page but is courtesy of a fabulous little script written by Scott Yanff.

iTunes Statistics Text Document

Now these statistics were taken late December 26, 2009 of my personal library. It is a snapshot of a year of iTunes use and listening. I was using iTunes before December 27, 2008 but it was on that date I decided to make a concerted effort to begin organizing my entire music collection after that date. I began reimporting everything with a deeper bit-rate and deleted my old, original collection. I did not use iTunes to listen to music, instead using it to create MP3 CDs to listen to at work and in the car. That all changed July 21, 2009 when I purchase an 8GB iPod Touch. Now I started using it to not only listen to music but to track my listening habits. A new OCD habit was formed and geekdom attained. 

I am listening to and then rating music in the same order I imported it. It is not a reflection of a particular bias. I love the New Wave stuff of the 1970s and 1980s but I imported that stuff much later and it is in my queue to listen to and rate. What is great about this method is that I am (re)discovering some great artists and songs. Creating new favorite lists of songs, albums, and artists is a brand new way to enjoy and appreciate music.

I am thinking that I will make it an annual ritual to do a statistical update of my listening habits with these two programs. It will be interesting to see how my musical tastes evolve.

I am not going to provide a book review, except summarize it by saying it is an entertaining memoir from a person from my generational cohort (so that means its full of Piss and Vinegar) who talks about his devotion to the Alternative Rock scene. What Sellers does in his Appendix that had my geek-senses all aflutter is create an elaborate, pretentious, but all so tasty combination of math and music fandom.

With John’s permission, I am pleased to make my own contribution to his formula by enshrining it in an Excel speadsheet. Now you too can see how your favorite artists align (or don’t) with John’s passion for the abrasive world of Alternative Rock. I would hope that John’s formula could become a template for others to tweak and create their own formulas.

Check it out…

John Sellars Formula

I am releasing for free ( hey, you get what you pay for ) my first album of Electronica music. I originally composed this music for a computer game that I had in development between 2004 and 2007, but that game has now been shelved and the music was good enough to still be shared.

So without further ado…

DJ Crsb is pleased to release his debut album called “Never Mind The Billogs Here’s Chris Billows”.

Yes, corny is what I aim for, but you will find the music not reflecting that tone. I might not be taking myself too seriously as far as the album name and sleeve is concerned, but I did work pretty diligently on this stuff and am proud of it.

Check it out and Merry Christmas to you.

Presents

(1) Standoff 2:31

(2) Duel 1:54

(3) Rising 1:51

(4) Chalk Shock 2:06

(5) Crystal Lullaby 2:12

(6) Fairy Tale Down 2:53

(7) It’s Never Too Late To Rewind 2:46

(8) Soft Space Scrap 3:11

The game is called Skipping Stones and more information can be found here and here.

The guys at Complex Games are very talented and determined. I have no doubt that they will succeed.

Congratulations to Complex Games on announcing the release of their first game.

Once you begin importing all of your music, what do you do next? Rate them! iTunes has a robust 5 star rating system that allows you to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Since rating music is considered to be a personal matter, there are some who think that it does not matter how these ratings are arrived at. Personally I believe in having some standards or rules when it comes to deciding how to rate music. Here are some suggested standards:

1) Don’t confuse bad music as being the same as music you don’t like. Good and bad is pretty relative (though not completely) when it comes to music. Strive to be objective about what you are rating for. Is  it about how the music makes you feel? Do you like the instrumentals? The lyrics? Is it what the artist stands for? The production values?

2) Rate only music that you honestly can appreciate. If you don’t like Rap music, then don’t rate it until you have given it an honest try and can appreciate what it trying to do. I think its an form of intellectual dishonesty to rate something you don’t understand. The challenge is to blend personal opinion with some kind of objective criteria.

3) Don’t be lazy and rate everything 5 Stars or 3 Stars or whatever. Yep, I’m judgmental. Giving every song 5 stars is making the rating function useless and why even don’t bother using it?

4) You will likely rate different kinds of musical moods or themes more favorably than others. It is normal to have a natural bias. I personally have a low tolerance for sappy love songs from the 50’s. I find they are just too syrupy for me. Instead, I am attracted to artists who have a dark, ironic, and melancholy sound. According to my 5 star rating system, if the song is competently delivered, even if it is a theme / mood that I do not like then I will rate it the minimum of 2 Stars. Objectively the song is competent and fine, but it simply does not appeal to me.

5) You should listen a few times before rating the music. I have found myself changing some of my ratings higher or lower because I hear the song differently the next time I hear them. I tend to listen to the CDs three to four times, before importing it into iTunes. Once in iTunes, I then will listen to it a few more times before rating it. It is rigorous, but somebody has to too it.

6) The purpose of rating music is to help you find out more about what you like. Its a process of discovery. Music is a fantastic thing that always offers something new as long as you are looking for it. A diligent rating system will organically and even magically create a personal stream of favorite artists / moods / and genres. Its almost like a form of self-discovery.

It takes work to do this, but if there is one quality that I possess, it is an almost obsessive need to complete things. Its a bit of my OCD coming out . And like anything that requires effort, the rewards reflect the energy you put into it. The question is what does a 1 Star song mean in contrast to a 3 Star song? I have created a rating system for iTunes that is a variation on the BilLOGs Rating System:

1 Star = A song better not released. To get labeled the same as a steaming pile is ironically not done from an emotional perspective, but from an attempted objective perspective. 1 Star songs are those cursed with terrible sound, usually due to poor production choices and/or technical problems. It signifies an amateur effort which should rarely happen in professionally released music. Another way of thinking about this: I listened to it and don’t want to ever hear it again since the poor production or recording issues gets in the way of enjoying the music.

2 Stars = A song that is okay/fine but does not appeal to me. This is where music genres that I might not fully appreciate or enjoy would go. A 2 Star rating is not an indication of bad music, but just a genre/theme that does not do much for me. This is where aesthetics or taste comes in in contrast to the 1 Star rating. Another way of thinking about this:  I listened to it and would consider listening to it again if I was bored and had nothing else to listen to (which is highly unlikely).

3 Stars = A song that I liked and appeals to me. This is music that I would consider to be good music (from a personal perspective). These songs will be in a genre / mood / theme that resonates with me. Another way of thinking about this: I listened to it and would want to hear it about once a month, would hum along, and consider it to capture a particular mood.

4 Stars = A song that I am really fond of and have become attached to. This is music I would consider to be great music that best represents a particular artist or genre. Another way of thinking about this: I listened to it and would want to hear it again every week. This song would get me humming and moving along to it. It would be the best example of a particular mood or theme.

5 Stars = A song that I love. This is music that spans genres and generations. It is the best example of music. The stuff that reaches into my gut, gives me goosebumps, makes my hair stand on end, puts me into convulsions… alright I am exaggerating but you get the idea Another way of  thinking about this is: I can listen to this song multiple times in a row, every hour, and every day. This is the best of music that cuts across time and place for me. It is not defined by a mood, but instead defines a mood.

Since I have publicly disclosed my love affair with iTunes, I thought I would share some the my lessons in love.

The first lesson I learnt in importing one’s music library into iTunes is: Do it right from the beginning. (Not really helpful eh?)

What I mean by “right”, is that you should import all of your songs off the entire CD, and do it at the top end of the bit-rate range.

The first mistake I made is that when I started doing the importing about two years ago, I was anxious about running out of hard drive space. I would try to pick the top five songs off every CD. When I started importing my CDs, I would listen to them, identify which tracks that I wanted to import into iTunes, write those down, do the import, and finally place the CD in storage. It became a headache in having to debate when a song made the cut or didn’t.

Well, I eventually learned that a song that I might have not liked when I first heard it, might be worth re-listening to when prompted by an article or recommendation. Now I had to go dig the CD out of storage and then insert it, find the track, etc. It would be so much easier to go to iTunes and load the track to play instantly.

The second mistake I made is that I was importing at a lower or shallower bit-rate. I started with 128 and later moved up to 160 bit. I then decided that it would be best to do the most optimized bit-rate of space and sound. My settings are: 192kbps / VBR-on, Highest-on 44.100 kHz, Smart-on, Filter-on

I am now re-ripping a bunch of CDs because I was too cheap to begin with.

And I am keeping to MP3 format and not using the Apples AAP format mostly for legacy purposes. I still burn MP3 CDs for use in my car and various CD players. Even though I am sure in five to ten years, MP3 CDs will not be required, the MP3 format is just too ubiquitous to be usurped by the next generation of digital music.

I have loved music for as long as I can remember. Playing music on records (I still remember my first record player and albums when I was six), then to cassettes, and then CDs. But it was the combination of music and computers that opened up new possibilities to think about music.

Combining music with computers in the form of MP3 files was a revelation for me, but I struggled with finding a program that would do everything I wanted. I tried everything except iTunes since I wrongly believed that I needed an iPod to use it and that it would not play or catalog my MP3 files, just the ones purchased off the iTunes store. So about two years ago, I decided to see what everyone was raving about, I downloaded version 7 and immediately fell in love.

What charmed me was that my most wanted features at that time were being provided:

• iTunes provided a clean and attractive interface that controls the folders of the MP3 files. Unlike many other control freaks out there, I don’t care what the file or folder is named, I just care that the files are there and easily found.
• iTunes allowed me to create MP3 CDs with customizable and dynamic playlists. If I wanted a Punk CD, I just create a dynamic smart-playlist that sorts out Punk bands in the Genre heading and its all there.
• These playlists can be also ordered in any fashion I see fit. If I want to create a customized playlist that focuses on year, genre, and mood, I can easily do this. I do not need to follow the default folder system that many other MP3 list makers do.
• iTunes usually tags compilation / greatest hit albums with the songs individual dates which was really important to me. I don’t care what year a compilation comes out, I care when a song is released.

So now for the past 10 months I have been importing every one of my CDs into iTunes. So far I am up to 10,000 songs being imported and there are many more to go. iTunes not only satisfied me when it first came out, but continues to be improved and is up to version 9.

And Apple sure knows how to market. Not only did they provide a superior free product, but the software’s appeal eventually lured me to a recent purchase of an iPod Touch about two months ago which I love.

I have been manipulated into marriage with Apple through an affair with iTunes. And I could’nt be happier being had.

What if you could own a ticket that would allow you to purchase a company if it did well? Would it not be kind of like having insurance policy that you could exercise if the conditions were right?

Film or theatrical producers often buy the right – but not the obligation – to dramatize a specific book or script. That is what a stock option is.

A stock option is the right to buy (call option) or sell (put option) a specific number of shares of a company, at a certain price, by a specified date.

They add a delay effect to the normal direct purchasing and selling of companies. This delay if used wisely, can give you added advantages as an investor. Because of this, Options are very sophisticated financial instruments and should only be done once you have a working understanding of the stock market.

Options Help Limits Losses

Consider this for a moment; two men invest in the same stock. One man invests $10,000 and he hopes the stock will rise. The best outcome could be that the stock doubles and the downside is that it goes bankrupt.  He could make 100% profits or lose 100%.  He either gains $10,000 or loses $10,000 or anything in-between.

The other man invests in the same stock but with proper options. He only risks $1,000 because the options allow him to purchase rights to stocks without having to outright purchase all of them. With these options, if the stock doubles, they will be worth 10 times what he bought it for.  His upside is 1,000% gain or $10,000 while his downside is only $1,000 or anything in-between.

Two men invest in the same stock.  Both have the same upside potential while one of the men has 10 times the risk. Now this was just to illustrate that high profit does not have to mean unacceptable risk, thanks to Options.

Leveraging with Options

Lets say you have the opportunity to purchase an option on IBM. It would be written something like:

APPL Oct 100 Call at $2.00.

This is a call option. The company associated with it is Apple Computers, trading as APPL on the stock exchange. The strike price is $100. If you own this option, you can decide to buy Apple stock at $100 per share, even if it should be trading at $90 or $110 per share.

The cost to buy this option is $2.00 which is multiplied by the number of shares which is in multiples of 100. This means the lowest amount you could spend would be $200 (100 shares x $2.00) plus your broker commissions.

Each option has an expiry date, in our example, it would be the one month away. If you do nothing and your option expires, you lose your $200 (plus commissions). This may seem like a loss, but it would be better to lose $200 instead of being forced to purchase 100 shares of Apple at $100 or $10,000 only to find that it is now trading at $90 per share. This would result in an automatic unrealized loss of $1,000 and you now have tied up $10,000 of you capital into a stock waiting for it to go up.

Options can also be shorted just like stocks can be shorted. If you believe that a stock will go down in price, but don’t want to pony up the total investment, you can buy an option with a strike price being lower than what it is currently trading at.

It gets complicated, and requires a leap of understanding, but as you can see, if understood and used wisely, stock options can help you immensely in your investment strategy.

Christopher Billows is the publisher of In The Money, the Stock Options Trading Course, a 60 page eBook. Hundreds of people have found the eBook giving them the investing edge they need to keep ahead of inflation and taxes. For more information and to purchase the eBook go to www.mandalainvesting.com.

Every good investor knows that he should set aside some of his portfolio for long-term, lower-risk investments.  The other portion can be used for medium to higher-risk investments depending on your financial circumstances and other life factors.

Allocate Wisely

A good rule of thumb to follow is:  Allocate 50% of your portfolio for the long-term, lower risk category no matter how great a speculative short term pick may appear.

This will take discipline, but on more than one occasion it will probably save you in no small way.

Most of the systems and strategies you find on the Internet are high-risk, high-gain where you can be wiped out in a single transaction.

Take a risk! I do, but only with a certain percent of my funds. You should do the same.

So let’s say for example that you choose to invest in long-term, lower-risk stocks with 50% of your portfolio.

Let’s start by defining what a good long-term stock is. Some will call them large-cap stocks, other’s call them Blue Chip stocks.

Blue Chips will be the common stock of a nationally known company that has a long record of profit growth, dividend payments, and a reputation for quality management, products, and services. Some examples would be International Business Machines, General Electric, and DuPont. They are relatively high priced and have moderate dividend yields.

There is no true master list of Blue Chip stocks. That is because the definition of what is and isn’t a blue chip stock varies greatly. Essentially though, its a consistent top performing stock.

Look to such indexes as Dow Jones Industrial Averages and Standard and Poor’s 100 Averages to see such lists.

The problem is that you may invest in long-term, lower-risk stocks that stagnate for years on end.  Yet, even such stocks have their ups and downs and the profit you see (or don’t see) can be exacerbated by current market conditions.

Your entry time could be poor and you may have to wait years to see a break-even point on such a stock.

You still need a proven strategy with so-called “stable” investment stocks.

Buy and Sell Wisely

To get the most gain out of the stocks you buy and help to minimize your risk, you need to employ one of the tools used by professionals, which is Technical Analysis. You will use some Technical analysis to help you determine the price to buy in and the price to sell. Technical analysis is merely putting a stock through a mathematical formula.

When you employ this tool properly, you can get many times the profit you currently get or others get with the old ‘buy and hold’ strategy.

Each technical indicator is made to tell you something slightly different.  Some will tell you the momentum of a stock, its trend strength, volatility limits, how much its diverging from previous price patterns.

Some of these indicators, while good, are for short-term action.  Others are more geared for long-term action.  So just because someone swears by an indicator, it doesn’t mean that its the right indicator for you in a certain application.

The indicator that we have become familiar with is called the Stochastic oscillator. This indicator is a momentum indicator that is based on closing prices of a stock that doesn’t take into account wild daily fluctuations.  It bases the current close against previous closes to indicate buying pressure or selling pressure.

Simple use of this indicator can make you lose money quick should you not understand how to properly use it. If you have ever traded using momentum indicators, you know that many false signals can be created. Whipsaws or false movements that quickly reverse in the indicator create further problems. The more people try to compensate for the weaknesses in the indicator, the worse it seems to get.

That is until development of the K-39 Theory, also called the Last Stochastic Theory. This theory will guide you in how to ignore those false signals and take advantage of the built-in momentum of the stock.

This way you can find ways to trade the best Blue Chip stocks and know when are the better times to buy and sell. You will then have the bluest of the blue chips thanks to this method.

Christopher Billows is the publisher of In The Money, the Stock Options Trading Course, a 60 page eBook. Hundreds of people have found the eBook giving them the investing edge they need to keep ahead of inflation and taxes. For more information and to purchase the eBook go to www.mandalainvesting.com.

It’s a cruel joke. I worked for hundreds of hours on my publication, Polls, Parties, and Power: Distortion and Wasted Votes in Canada’s Election 1980-2000. I was convinced that people would see “the facts” and naturally gravitate to adopt Proportional Representation. Now, I have come to admit that voting reform does not matter. What I thought was important, is important no more.

But that does not mean I am discounting my efforts. I am proud of my publication and my early efforts in the voting reform movement. I learned so much from doing it and would like to share the culmination of my efforts with you.

Check it out…

Polls, Parties, and Power: Waste and Distortion
in Canada’s Elections 1980-2000

Published 2002
312 Pages ~ Format: PDF ~ Size: 4.86MB
Download it by right-clicking and selecting ‘Save As’.

K – Keep invested

I – Invest in stocks

S – Self-direct your investments

S – Small investments possess an advantage

K – Keep invested and don’t become discouraged

There are lots of people who enter the stock market, get burned, drop out, and then hand their finances over to a broker or mutual fund seller. That is the wrong thing to do. Losing money in the stock market is all a part of learning how to invest.

I have lost thousands on bad investments but I have also made more thousands on good investments. I still come out ahead because the good investments are that much better and I have invested wisely. The worst thing I could do is become discouraged and drop out of the market.

Investing is like any skill. It takes practice and knowledge to master. You need to keep investing and learning. The trick is to start small and increase your investments as your mastery develops.

Consistent contributions are critical especially if you are depositing into a retirement account. Every contribution will help reduce your taxes payable and all of your gains are allowed to grow tax-free.

I – Invest in stocks and instruments related to stocks

The best place to park your money is in stocks. There are thousands to choose from but for long term planning it is best to pick sold big capital stocks that are the basis of your long term plan.

You can invest in mutual funds but be prepared to get poorer results. Diversification is taken to the negative extreme in these financial instruments and the fund has to overcome its own hefty management fees before it can even turn a profit for you. You can find better results by investing in a few sold companies and in Exchange Traded Funds.

Stocks come in five basic varieties. You want to avoid the last one and invest in the others depending on your investing philosophy.

a) Blue-Chip Stock – Solid companies whose steady profits allow it to pays out dividends. These should make up a majority of your stock portfolio.

b) Growth Stock – Typically technology or biotechnology companies that grow and expand. Rarely do they pay out dividends because they plow their profits back into the expansion.

c) Value Stocks – Companies that the market has undervalued. The market is not always rational and sometimes these companies make great buy-out opportunities for other firms.

d) Mad Money Stocks – Very speculative stocks that are not making any profits but have a product you believe in. Depending on your investing constitution, set aside 0-10% of your portfolio for some speculative fun.

e) The Dregs – Companies that are losing money, revenue, and leadership. Avoid these unless you are interested in betting against their decline in what is called ‘shorting’.

Some investment firms will value stocks by the size of the company in stock value. That is useful to tell you how big a company is, but it would be like valuing the denomination of dollar bills – a $100 is always worth more that a $20 bill – so what? Two companies might trade for $100 but in actual fact the worth of the company behind the stock price is like a $100 bill in US money and a $100 bill in Mexican money. They are not worth the same amount.

General Motors is one of the largest publicly traded companies but should not be considered a blue-chip. GM has had declining revenues, has debt problems, and faces very stiff competition from the Asian automakers.

S – Self-directed accounts ensures lower trading costs and control

Get a self-directed/discount brokerage account. Do not go with a stock broker if you have every intention of taking control of your financial future.

This allows you to both save money and act in contrarian ways when the rest of the market is panicking. It is possible to double your money on stocks that everyone has given up on. The fact is most investors operate on fear and emotion. You can win in the stock market if you are one of those people who blink last.

S – Smallness can be an advantage in the investing world

Not having millions of dollars is an advantage you can leverage to your benefit. Large institutional investors like pension plans and mutual funds cannot enter the market without hurting some of their investments. You on the other hand, can purchase stocks at great prices without driving up the price. You can also get out of a stock investment without worrying about driving down the price.

Having millions of dollars to invest has its own set of headaches, one you likely want to experience, but until then, you should take advantage of your smaller size as an investor. Nimbleness has distinct advantages in the stock market. Enjoy it while you are still small.

There you have it: the KISS principle for the investing world. Hopefully, you will be inspired to take control over your investments with these principles.

Christopher Billows is the publisher of In The Money, the Stock Options Trading Course, a 60 page eBook. Hundreds of people have found the eBook giving them the investing edge they need to keep ahead of inflation and taxes. For more information and to purchase the eBook go to www.mandalainvesting.com.

Unfortunately for the most part we have been sold a product that does what it says but does not deliver what you need.

Yes, mutual funds do invest in the stock market.

Yes, mutual funds do diversify the risk over hundreds of stocks but…

No, most mutual funds do not give you the returns you need.

Diversify and Die?

Mutual Funds will give you built in diversification. Some of them invest in entire stock market indexes, others invest into a combination of stocks and bonds, and some invest into other company mutual funds (which are called Fund of Funds, yikes!).

Diversification of your investment money is important. You should never put all of your money into one company. Because you have no control over how that company does or how other investors react to the company’s news, it is best to hedge your dollars by spreading the risk around.

Yet it is possible to over-diversify. Because mutual funds have so much money to invest, they struggle with finding good companies to buy. To keep to the rules of diversifying the portfolio, they cannot invest usually more than 5% of their assets in one single company. This results in lots of dollars being invested into companies you would never consider.

Mutual Funds have to buy lots of mediocre or bad companies because they need to diversify and do something with the billions of dollars they have. It gives the fund shareholders the impression that their money is being invested and the fund managers gladly charge you a healthy management fee.

Active Management is an Expense

Professional management of millions of dollars does not come cheap for most mutual funds. You can expect to pay 2% up to 8% for some specialized funds. These means that if you make 5% return, you would have actually have earned 8% if the Management Fee is 3%. That means that the Mutual Fund has to earn 3% before they can even pay you.

Dollar Cost Averaging is not a benefit if you are getting poor returns. Believe me, I invested consistently for fifteen years directly into various mutual funds. I bought over $125,000 in mutual funds with the biggest dealer and ended up with an averaged return of a criminal 2.05% a year!

It makes far more sense to contribute to a money market fund where there are no fluctuations and then use that fund to make your investment purchases.

Mutual funds do have the advantage of providing liquidity. You can sell and have your cash within a couple of days. But the question is begged why are you pulling out? Investment money is money you should not need right away.

Mediocrity is the Name of the Fund

The sad fact about Mutual Funds is that most them rarely beat the market. It is estimated that only 1.3% of American Mutual Funds will beat the S&P 500. Mutual Funds are investment products and should not be seen as a complete investing solution.

Mutual Funds that get 20% returns in one year have a poor chance of duplicating their results. Companies do a better job of providing consistent performance compared to MFs. If you buy a mutual fund that did well you have a greater chance of it doing poorly the following year.

But just like the stock market where most of them are not worth investing into, the same thing exists in the mutual fund industry. There does exist a small segment that does capture decent, but not market-beating returns. If you want to delegate some of your investment dollars to the responsibility of another, then mutual funds are the way to go. But when doing so, you need to lower your expectations.

The Best Solution: Take Control

If you want diversity protection, low management expenses, and equivalent to market results get Exchange Traded Funds. They should make up a decent portion of your portfolio. You can only get those by opening up a brokerage account.

But while you are opening up a brokerage account and doing dome research into Exchange Traded Funds, you might as well look into investing into stocks. It is only in the stock market where you can get market beating returns and stay way ahead of inflation and taxes.

Stop accepting the pale imitation of stock market returns through the veil of mutual funds. Invest directly and take control.

Christopher Billows is the publisher of In The Money, the Stock Options Trading Course, a 60 page eBook. Hundreds of people have found the eBook giving them the investing edge they need to keep ahead of inflation and taxes. For more information and to purchase the eBook go to www.mandalainvesting.com.

But just like most stocks, most of them are not worth your time.

This article will tell you what is wrong with most stock picking systems and what to look for in a system that works. There are basically three fundamental mistakes that need to be avoided.

They are:

1)    Choosing a system that is too narrow.
2)    Choosing a system that is too broad.
3)    Choosing a system that is too inflexible.

Mistake #1: Picking a System that is too narrow

Some systems will base their entire strategy on just technical indicators, multi-day candlestick patterns, or some form of divergence. The problem is that all of these systems are only using two factors: price and volume.

Imagine if you were about to invest in a horse that competed in racing. Would you be satisfied with only the weight and speed of the horse?  No matter how you graphed those two variables, they are only two criteria. You should also be interested in the breed of the animal, the competition it was racing against, the jockey’s qualifications, and the horse’s age, to name just a few important details.

Most stock systems do not factor in anything but price movement and volume. These systems do not screen for overall market conditions, industry type, company specifics such as profitability, and much more.  You need to take in the factors that matters as we investing is more than finding a magical pattern that you hope will be like Midas’s touch. Finding the right stock and timing your buy and sells takes expertise and common sense.

Mistake #2: Picking a System that is too broad

A stock system should not be too broad in its scope.  Many well intentioned professionals give vague tips and broad guidelines to follow.  Why? Most are afraid of being wrong. You cannot be right all the time but this is exactly what they may try to do.  By giving too many choices they always leave themselves a back-door to rationalize, after the fact, that they were still right.

You need to covers many areas, but also recognize the need to give precise signals to buy and sell.  Is it right all the time? Of course not, but you also do not need to be to make amazing gains.  You merely need to know the secret of riding the profits as long as possible while minimizing your losses and cutting them short.

At the end of the day you want an expert opinion that is clear and precise. That is what you get if you find a system that is neither too narrow nor too broad.

Mistake #3: Picking System that is too inflexible

Most stock picking systems available now come as plug-ins to an automated piece of software. While helping to automate the process it also takes the power away from you as the investor. What happens when the market changes? Does your rigid piece of software change with it? Will you be able to detect what variables have changed and alter them to keep your profitable streak or will you keep hoping while it drains your account?

As well, all investors are different. Your system should be able to conform to your ideologies and values and not the other way around.

You need a system that adapts to you. Are you into high reward with higher risk?  You can alter this system for making a double-bagger each month while raising your risk levels.  Do you prefer to buy and hold winning stocks for a longer period of time and squeeze every last cent from it and only trading a few times per year? Do you prefer to trade the best of the gold stocks, or high tech, or some other industry?

The best system takes the best of the stock market and fits it to your goals, comfort levels, and style.

The Solution is to Ask the Right Questions

When it comes to picking stocks you need a system, and you need a system that avoids the three mistakes. The best option is to find a stock picking system that provides to you the control and precision that you need to win the investment game.

Do some search engine research with the terms “stock picking system” and you will find lots of possibilities. You need to evaluate them by asking the right questions. Make sure you ask if the systems you are looking at provide precision and adaptability. When you find the system that answers those questions, you have found your solution.

Christopher Billows is the publisher of In The Money, the Stock Options Trading Course, a 60 page eBook. Hundreds of people have found the eBook giving them the investing edge they need to keep ahead of inflation and taxes. For more information and to purchase the eBook go to www.mandalainvesting.com.

It was my first attempt at Retroactive Continuity and was one of those points that gave me some excitement relating to world construction which has influenced me in my work with Promaginy.

Ultima Storyline FAQ by Chris Paul Billows

Final Version 1.5 10/30/95

The purpose of this FAQ is to ask and answer some the questions that come up when one plays any of the Ultima game. These questions do not pertain so much to how to solve the game in particular but is more to try to make sense of some of the inconsistencies that exist within the story line between each game.

I) Why an Ultima Storyline FAQ?

Why would you want to waste your time trying to make sense out of a computer game, why not just play the bloody thing and enjoy it?!

I am not doing this to read any deep meanings into the Ultima games. I enjoy just playing the games like thousands of others do but I find it fun and entertaining to find plausible answers to some of the story line inconsistencies. To me it is like writing a story which allows me to enjoy playing Ultima in a different way.

Furthermore the purpose of this FAQ is not to make the story of Ultima believable! It is a fun attempt to make sense out of the storyline. I will not attempt to cite historical and scientific accounts of time doors actually existing on Earth like they do in Ultima II as that is neither important or the purpose of this FAQ. The Ultima series is fantasy and this FAQ seeks to make that fantasy more enjoyable.

Are there not books out there that already answer many questions concerning Ultima?

The two books I have (The Official Book of Ultima by Shay Addams and Master Ultima by Ralph Roberts) are both very good in terms of helping the reader complete the individual games. But what this FAQ is to do is answer some of the questions concerning the story line which in many places is very inconsistent. So I see this FAQ having a unique purpose.

Which Ultima games does this FAQ apply to?

All of the following:

• Ultima I
• Ultima II: The Revenge of the Enchantress
• Ultima III: Exodus
• Ultima VI: The Quest of the Avatar
• Ultima V: Warriors of Destiny
• Ultima VI: The False Prophet
• Ultima VII: The Black Gate / Forge of Virtue and Serpent Isle / Silver Seed
• Ultima VIII: Pagan
• Ultima Underworld I: The Stygian Abyss
• Ultima Underworld II: Labyrinth of Worlds
• Worlds of Ultima I: The Savage Empire
• Worlds of Ultima II: Martian Dreams

Since the second and third trilogies are more consistent in terms of storyline there isn’t as great the need to answer many questions concerning those games. As well the Worlds of Ultima games are more like “side adventures” that have little to do with the Britannia/Guardian theme so they will not be focused on too much in this FAQ. If people do have questions or answers concerning any of the Ultima games they can e-mail them to me to be entered into the FAQ.

II) Questions and Answers to the Ultima Storyline.

In the first trilogy there existed up to five different races available to players. They were humans, dwarves, elves, bobbits, and fuzzies (who appeared only in Ultima III). In Ultima IV and onwards only humans were available to play with. What ever happened to the dwarves, elves, bobbits, and fuzzies?

A combination of factors eliminated these races from further Ultimas:

1. The continent of Sosaria was transformed between Ultima III and IV. Many people of all races were killed due to this violent transformation, but because these other races were less populous than the humans they had a more difficult time surviving.
2. In Ultima IV and onwards these other races still exist within Britannia but play a non-role because of their reduced numbers, self-induced isolation, and because of the dawning of human achievement.

Note, however, that in Ultima Underworld I, Dwarves are reintroduced. As well we see in Ultima VII new races appear such as the Emps and the Faeries. We could assume that the Fuzzies from Ultima III evolved into Emps while Elves from Ultima I through III became the Faerie race.

How do you explain the presence of high-tech weapons, armor, and vehicles in Ultima I and II despite the fantasy/medieval atmosphere of both games? As well, from Ultima III and onwards these high-tech items do not exist, how do you explain their disappearance?

In Ultima I Mondain the Wizard was intent on world domination. He was also intent on conquering other civilizations. Using his magic and power, Mondain altered the dimension doors (the very same ones that allowed for Lord British and all later heros to enter Sosaria) so that they would allow him to enter a point in time into the future. In this new dimension Mondain encountered and became allied to an alien race who too shared Mondain’s thirst for power.

With these new allies Mondain intended to totally conquer Sosaria and many other dimensions. Adventurers and earlier heros managed to use Mondain’s time door to steal some of the weapons, armor and transport that belonged to the aliens for the defense of Sosaria. Merchants eventually got a hold of some of these items as well and began to sell them to those who could afford them. Thus the presence of high-technology became common in Sosaria.

In Ultima II the game takes place no longer in Sosaria but on Earth. This change of battleground alone explains the presence of biplanes, blasters, reflect armor, and spaceships among other things. The presence of time doors upon Earth is something that will be explained later.

In Ultima III the battle has shifted back to Sosaria (though a radically different place than before) and we find that the high tech items of the earlier games no longer exist. The only explanations for this lie in the actions of Lord British who had decided to do away with these items since their potential for evil was far too great.

He felt that these items posed a threat to the natural balance of Sosarian life. Besides with the death of Mondain, the dimension door to the future had closed and these high-tech items could no longer be recharged/repaired thus limiting their usefulness. You can bet that the merchants were sure upset!

Yet Ultima III does have an element of high-technology within its story. This is based on the fact that Exodus is actually a computer! It seems likely that Mondain and Minax had worked together and combined their black magic with the sciences of the future dimension opened by Mondain to create Exodus.

Why do the continents change so drastically in the first three Ultimas?

The only change that does actually take place is between Ultima I and III, since Ultima II is played on Earth and not Sosaria. Sosaria as found in Ultima I consists of 4 separate continents, with towns, castles, and dungeons found on each one. The change to the world as seen in Ultima III is quite radical since it changes to a world of two continents, one of which has Lord British and various towns, while the other is largely uninhabited.

It seems that the loss of two continents can only be explained by some kind of massive cataclysm (perhaps a comet hitting the planet, or the last dying magical wish of Mondain) which totally gutted two continents and transformed the others. The continent that Lord British lived on (which became Sosaria in Ultima III) was spared in large part due to his magical power. The hidden continent of Ambrosia was created when the cataclysm submerged the continent, separating it from Sosaria.

In Ultima II the geography changes radically because the setting takes place in four different time eras of Earth. The reason for the change from Sosaria to Earth is that Minax wished to destroy the planet that produced the hero who killed Mondain. Minax accomplishes this by creating time doors upon Earth to go into the past and future and set up the conditions for a nuclear confrontation. It was the goal of the hero in Ultima II to defeat Minax so that the future created by her would not come to pass.

The transformation of Sosaria in Ultima III to Britannia in Ultima IV can be explained by the ending of Ultima III when the heros kill Exodus. Following the death of Exodus, great natural catastrophes took place which was due to a self-destruct mechanism that would be activated if Exodus was ever destroyed. The catastrophes consisted of earthquakes and volcanic explosions killed many people and also transformed Sosaria into what is now Britannia.

Please also note that Ambrosia returned in Ultima VII and that Serpent Isle itself is one of the four Ultima I continents. Thus those original continents of Sosaria still play a role in the Ultima series.

How do you explain the presence of Lord British on Earth during Ultima II when he belonged in Sosaria?

Lord British used the portal to come back to Earth to help the hero of Ultima II to defeat Minax. Since Minax had plans to destroy the Earth, Lord British worked to prevent this by summoning the hero and then providing support during this battle on Earth. When Minax was defeated Lord British returned to Sosaria to help in its rebuilding. It was likely during this time that Lord British also recruited many of the future Avatar Companions, such as Dupre and Jaana to invite back to Sosaria.

Why is it in Ultima I-III players steal, cheat, kill “innocents”, and commit other non-virtuous actions, yet that all changes in Ultima IV and on?

In each of the first three Ultimas, players found themselves in a time where survival was of the utmost importance. Because of the great threat that the Triad of Evil represented to Sosaria and Earth little importance was placed on virtues and principles. Thus players found themselves doing some un-avatarish things such as stealing, lying or even killing “innocents” (Remember the Clown in Ultima I)!

Despite what traditional history tells us, it was not the Avatar who saved Sosaria and Earth from the Triad of Evil, but it was other brave individuals who sometimes had to do wrong things for the right reasons. (Stealing food in Ultima II was a necessity if the player wished to live)! This all changed after Exodus was defeated and a new age came into being. Lord British rediscovered the ancient ways of Avatarhood that existed in ancient Sosaria, and called out for the players to now embody this new philosophy. Thus the eight virtues and the three principles became a new way of living for Britannia, its inhabitants and its visitors.

This theory runs in conflict with that posted by Batlin in his rendition of Britannia history (as in Ultima VII). Batlin states that the Triad of Evil was defeated by the Avatar and that he never committed any non-virtuous acts. This makes little sense as one of the main purposes of Ultima IV was for the player to actively strive to attain Avatarhood which is something the player never had to do in the first trilogy.

Furthermore having a human Avatar playing a role in the first trilogy makes no sense as players could choose to be any race or class they wanted. It is unfair to assume that all of the Ultima series has to be formed around the Avatar character. Surely throughout Sosaria’s and Britannia’s history there must have been other heroes and heroines.

Why does the magic system change so much through the Ultimas?

All of the same basic spells appear in each Ultima. (for example there is a magic missile and blink spell in each Ultima) Some new ones are created due to progress in the magic arts, while some old ones are lost. It seems that spell components were abundant in earlier times (Ultima I-III) such that if you needed something,

it was easily found along the countryside. After Exodus was destroyed, the lands went through violent change and spell components became harder to come by. It thus became more expensive to collect these reagents and thus players were now charged for them which is a practice that began in Ultima IV.

Also in Ultima II players were also charged for acquiring spells but we must remember that this episode took place on Earth, were magic is rare and to practice it is expensive. Think of all the props that David Copperfield must buy! Seriously the presence of magic on Earth during Ultima II can only be explained by the presence of the time doors which linked up Earth and magical realms such as Sosaria and the Age of Legends. From Ultima IV and onwards the magic system remains relatively stable and only seems to change if the player moves to a different land such as Pagan.

It is important to note that in Ultimas I and II an often used spell was the Prayer spell to call upon the aid of a personal deity. This is unique since in Ultima III the Priests seemed to rely on the power of truth instead. From Ultima IV onwards there have been no signs of deities existing or playing an active role in the history of Britannia. Possibly the deities of Ultima I and II did not survive the cataclysms that shook Sosaria from Ultima to Ultima.

How would you explain the changing of professions between some of the Ultimas? For example in Ultimas I through III there is a Priest class yet there is not such class in Ultima IV and onwards. As well how do you explain the changing of professions by certain characters, such as Shamino being a Ranger in Ultima IV but in Ultima V he is a Fighter?

The Priest profession transformed over time between Ultima I, II and III from that of a god following profession to one that follows the way of truth. Many of the spells in Ultima III were truth oriented. For example they could turn undead since living death is an untruth and their second most powerful spell Zxkuqyb unleashed the power of truth onto all enemies. In Ultima IV and on truth is one of the three Principles upon which the Avatar’s virtues are based. The Priests’ disappearance was due to the fact that evil was mostly banished from the land which made their existence as a distinct profession not necessary. Instead their order disbanded and turned to forming towns based on the virtue of truth. Some towns created were Moonglow, Trinsic and Yew.

Shamino and others likely changed their profession due to necessary circumstances. Each of the eight professions of Ultima IV ended up congregating into the three major professions of Ultima V and VI. It looked like this:

Fighter, Ranger, Paladin, Shepherd      -->     Fighter
Bard, Tinker                            -->     Bard
Mage, Druid                             -->     Mage

The reason for the change was to have each of the eight professions embody the three Principles more than the eight Virtues. The Fighters embodied Courage, the Bards embodied Love, while the Mages embodied Truth. This took place due to the pressures of the three Shadowlords who tried to corrupt the three Principles in Ultima V. The people of Britannia and the Avatar Companions responded by strongly emphasizing the three Principles in an effort to combat them.

What is the time lapse between Ultima I-VIII?

The time lapse is given while the reasons for the lapse follow:

The first era begins with the Triad of Evil and the resulting Three Ages of Darkness (A.D.) Time was not kept during this difficult era so these ages are identified only as 1st, 2nd and 3rd A.D. This era ends with the founding of the Codex of Ultimate Wisdom.

1st  A.D. The First Age of Darkness  : Mondain the Wizard
2nd  A.D  The Second Age of Darkness : Minax the Enchantress
3rd  A.D. The Third Age of Darkness  : Exodus

The second era involves the establishment of the Principles and Virtues as embodied by the Avatar. Thus this time was called the Ages of Virtue (A.V.) Time begins with the founding of the Codex by the Avatar. The “+” means that the resulting adventures happened around the time noted.

123  A.V. The Quest of the Avatar
139  A.V. Warriors of Destiny
161  A.V. The False Prophet
162+ A.V. Savage Empire; Martian Dreams
171  A.V. The Stygian Abyss
360+ A.V. The Black Gate; Labyrinth of Worlds; Serpent Isle

Since Pagan is in a different dimension from Britannia the time line changes no longer applies. We can assume Pagan has some unknown time line of their own. We can call this time the Guardian’s Age (G.A.).

...  G.A. Pagan

Is it possible to tie in the history of Ultima to the Wing Commander universe?

Sure it is. In fact in Ultima VII there are references to the Kilrathi! To explain this would not be too difficult. It would be safe to say that Earth would not be the only place that had portals connecting to Britannia. Surely some of the planets within the Kilrathi empire also had these portals as well.

Furthermore we could make an assumption that it was the Kilrathi that Mondain recruited in his efforts to conquer Sosaria in Ultima I! As well there is one reference of them in Ultima Underworld II. Unscramble the name ‘Trilkhai’ who are the creatures who dwelled in Killorn’s Keep and asked you to uncover their true identity and you get ‘Kilrathi’.

What are the origins of the Avatar’s Companions (Iolo, Dupre, Shamino, etc) and where did they come from?

Unfortunately not all of the origins of the Avatar’s Companions are known at this present time. What information I did collect was found in the book, Ultima : The Avatar Adventures (Copyright 1992).

Iolo the Bard is named David Watson in his Earth life, who really does make crossbows for a living. He and his wife, Gwenno, write songs together. They both first appeared in Ultima I.

Shamino the Ranger is in reality the only native Britannian. He does not have an Earth identity but appears to maintain his youthful appearance through some unknown means. Perhaps there is some bond between Shamino’s and Lord British’s slow aging and their identical physical appearance. Shamino first appeared in Ultima I.

Geoffrey the Fighter also has the Earth identity of Jeff Hillhouse who works for Richard Garriot. Geoffrey first appeared in Ultima IV.

Jaana the Druid is a friend of Richard Garriot whose Earth name is also Jaana. She first appeared in Ultima IV.

Mariah the Mage is in reality Richard Garriot’s personal secretary, whose Earth name is Michelle Caddel. Mariah first appeared in Ultima IV.

Why is it that people from Earth (Lord British and the Avatar) age at a slower rate then people in Britannia?

This could be linked up to the travels that take place between worlds through the moongates. When a person travels through a moongate their age is set back to a younger age. The basis of this could be found In Ultima VII; The Black Gate, where in a cave south of Dungeon Destard lives a unicorn. The unicorn explains that a person’s virginity is restored when you travel through an interworld moongate. It would seem logical that if virginity is restored, so should age.

I am flattered that this FAQ has reached the eyes of Mike McShaffry at Origin. Mike is the technical director for Ultima IX and has expressed his enjoyment of the FAQ! He has told me that Ultima IX will attempt to tie in many of the previous Ultimas into its storyline. Like many others I am looking forward to it!

Thanks to Ralph Roberts for his appreciation of the FAQ. Ralph is the author of the book, Master Ultima.

Since this FAQ was started over a year ago, it has made an attempt at answering some of the questions that have been hounding the Ultima games. Thanks to the great response I have received the most important questions related to the games have been answered! For this reason and due to other personal time commitments, I have decided to let the FAQ stand as it currently is and will not be making any more additions to it. What this means is that this FAQ will continue to be available but will no longer be updated by myself.

I have thoroughly enjoyed working on this FAQ! It was a new concept that was given allot of support by the great people on the Internet. If someone is interested in continuing the job of maintaining this FAQ I would be willing to entertain proposals.

I would like to thank countless people for their contributions and support. I hope you had as much fun as I did.

No, I didn’t think so.

While I do not believe in dragons as actual, living beings – I do believe that they exist as three harmful things that can steal your financial wealth.

Just like the King Arthur tales of old, these dragons will steal your wealth. Yet evolution has taught these dragons to be more subtle and sneaky and take from you without you even knowing it.

Like a Knight of the Round Table you need to challenge these beasts to protect your financial kingdom. The purpose of this article is to tell you about these dragons and how you can fight them.

Meeting the Dragons

1) The first is known as “The Dragon of Taxes”,
2) The second dragon is known as “The Dragon of Inflation”, and
3) The third and most important dragon is known as “The Dragon of Poor Performance”

Why is the third dragon the most important?

Well, the first two dragons you cannot defeat. The Dragon of Taxes and the Dragon of Inflation are immortal!

You see, the Dragon of Taxes represents the government’s ability to levy taxes on your earnings and wealth. Governments are always hungry for more revenue and will happily find ways to spend your money. You may elect somebody who will reduce your taxes, but you will always pay some kind of taxes. You cannot slay the Dragon of Taxes.

The Dragon of Inflation represents the demand of the marketplace for money and the interest policy of governments. Inflation may be high in some years and low in others, but it will always erode your spending power and your wealth. You cannot slay the Dragon of Inflation.

The third dragon known as The Dragon of Poor Performance is the only dragon that you can tame. The good news is that if you manage to tame this dragon, it will help you fight the effects of the other two dragons!

Fighting the Dragons

Let’s pretend that you are a brave knight and you set out to defeat the Dragon of Poor Performance. You attack but barely escape with your life because you misjudged the dragon’s ability. You decide that it’s best of lay low and lick your wounds.

Doing this seems like a wise move except that while you are resting the other two dragons come along and gobble you up!

You see, when you get poor performance in your investments either by picking too conservatively or not picking right, the returns you do get are eaten up by taxes and inflation. Ouch!

If you invest your money into something that is guaranteed to generate 5% a year, you have just ensured that you are not making the money you could have. There are investments out there that have consistently earned 8% a year and though they may be riskier, they should not be avoided.

Should you take increased risk for just a 3 point difference in the return? Yes! A 3 point difference does not seem like much, but when you factor in the magical effect of compounding returns, it is critical to get the better return.

Let us assume you wanted to invest $1,000 for your brand new child for him/her to have as a graduating gift when they turn 18. You invest it, forget about it, and never contribute another penny. You choose an investment that gives you a return of 5%.

Scenario 1 @ 5%

Starting amount – $1,000
Years – 18
Additional contributions – $0 per month
Rate of return – 5.00% compounded daily
Total amount you will have contributed – $1,000
Total at end of investment – $2,459

Not too shabby, but we still have not figured in inflation and taxes. Before we talk about those two, let us compare the result if you had picked an investment that generated 8% a year.

Scenario 2 @ 8%

Starting amount – $1,000
Years – 18
Additional contributions – $0 per month
Rate of return – 8.00% compounded daily
Total amount you will have contributed – $1,000
Total at end of investment – $4,220

Not surprising you would earn more money, but who would have known that the 3 point difference was worth $1,761 more! Taking the greater risk does pay off.

Avoiding Investment Risk is Risky To Your Financial Health

Risk is not a bad thing. You should learn how to manage risk, not avoid it.

Taxes and Inflation are facts of life and will always erode your wealth. Since you cannot avoid them, you need to learn how to manage them just like you need to manage risk. That only way you can do this by choosing investments that generate a higher return.

Want proof?

Using the two scenarios again lets assume that the government taxes you at 25%, for every dollar you earn; you give 25 cents to the Dragon of Taxes.

Scenario 1: A 5% return x 25% tax rate = 1.25 points off your 5% return = 3.75% actual return after taxes. That is just barely keeping above inflation which has typically run between 2% and 4% a year.

Scenario 2: A 8% return x 25% tax rate = 2.00 points off your 8% return = 6% actual return after taxes. Now this is a much better spread over inflation.

Do you see what I mean when I say that the Dragons of Taxes and Inflation will gobble you up when you invest poorly? The solution comes in taming the only dragon that can help us fight the other two.

Taming the Dragon of Poor Performance

One of the simplest ways of taming this dragon is to stop investing in guaranteed investments (CDs in the US and GICs in Canada). Use them as a place to store money for short term periods while you are figuring out where to invest your money, but never use it has your main investing strategy.

Get the best interest rate you can for your short term money. It is always better to get 3% than 2% for the reasons mentioned above, but since it is a place to just park your money, you need to get your money working harder for you.

To find better investments, you want to directly invest into companies on the stock exchange. Unlike interest based investments like bonds and CDs/GICs, the stock market provides a much higher rate of return.

You may think that investing in the stock market is like gambling. And it is gambling for those who do not understand the rules. But just like a knight needs to use a sword and shield properly to fight a dragon, you need to learn how to invest to get your best returns.

Consider at the minimum Exchange Traded Funds which are wonderful instruments that capture all of the returns found in the stock market. They do better than Mutual Funds and should be the shield in every knight’s armor.

But easily, the Excalibur sword of the investing world can be found in stocks and options investing. If you want to not just tame but slay the Dragon of Poor Performance, you want to start doing some research through websites, electronic courses, and books on “Stocks and Options”.

Remember that the greatest rewards come to those willing to manage the greatest risks!

Good luck in your quest to tame the dragons!

Christopher Billows is the publisher of In The Money, the Stock Options Trading Course, a 60 page eBook available at www.thestockoptionscourse.com. The eBook has given hundreds of people the investing edge they need to keep ahead of inflation and taxes.

The enjoyment and the potential of the medium has stuck with me and it has inspired me to launch my own game company Promaginy.

It also prompted me to self-publish an eBook called the Evolution of Computer Games. It was a humble attempt to analyze and not just track the lineal development of computer games. You are welcome to freely download the eBook here:

Evolution of Computer Games 2nd Edition
43 Pages~ Format: PDF ~ Size: 191KB
Download it by right-clicking and selecting ‘Save As’.

As stated in my earlier blog, I resigned as President of the Green Party of Manitoba in 2002. I had become disenchanted with electoral politics and felt that I no longer belonged. In hindsight, I think it was a combination of me changing and the Party changing. I still believed in the Greens so I kept my membership and waited from the sidelines to recharge. I had found that communicating my ideas to others had become exhausting because the mental disease of political correctness was infecting the party.

My resignation as President was just a foreshadowing to the mass resignation of competent party executive members that would take place in 2005. While my resignation in 2002 was for personal disenchantment with the political correctness creeping into the party, the 2005 resignation was due to the infestation of malignant society elements.

These elements were allowed to take root in the party because of our Green Party values and practices. The Green Party constitution that was endorsed during the founding convention of November 1998 was written to encompass the core values of the global Green movement such practicing consensus-based decision making. Later, we adopted a well-crafted policy on conflict resolution. These were all remarkable documents that captured the spirit of camaraderie and a non-confrontational approach not seen in conventional political parties.

We tried to be a political party that was different… and we were for a while. But being a small party with an alternative agenda, we attracted people who did not fit in the other political parties. Some of these people also did not fit well in mainstream society.

We attracted eco-activists, slackers, anti-society rebels, and ideologues who believed that humanity was a cancer that needed to be irradiated. Like a moth to light, we attracted people who wanted to remake society but in a method that was so radical and ideological that they pushed out the moderates. Unfortunately, we had no grill or glass to protect ourselves. Our naive policies of conflict resolution and consensus building allowed this malignant element to disrupt the party and eventually run it.

These people were not thinkers, but reactionaries. These were not people who possessed emotional intelligence, but used Machiavellian methods to get their way. These were not working, competent people who were engaged in society and who could relate to where larger society was going wrong, but were activists who thrived on conflict, posturing, and strident victimization.

I had my share of idealistic views, believing that it would be possible to create a kinder, more ecologically sane society through the Green Party. But I never shared the perverted interpretation of Green philosophy that I witnessed taking place.

It was in 2005 that almost all of the entire executive of the Green Party of Manitoba resigned citing an ‘unruly and ungovernable ‘ group of members who had paralyzed the party. What I had witnessed made me resign my lifetime membership. I also resigned from the Green Party of Canada at the same time. I had witnessed the same elements being battled in the federal party and despite the success of realists like Jim Harris, I had little faith it would last. As you will see in my Resignation Letter I directly accused both the federal and provincial parties of abandoning sensible party members in favor of the ideologues.

In Manitoba, this was particularly devastating for electoral advanced. We can see this by comparing the recent electoral results of the provincial Green Parties across Canada:

Ontario
In 2003 the party ran 102 of 103 candidates capturing 2.82% of the vote.
In 2007 the party ran 107 of 107 candidates capturing 8.03% of the vote.

Saskatchewan
In 2003 the party ran 27 out of 58 candidates capturing 0.55% of the vote.
In 2007 the party ran 48 out of 58 candidates capturing 2.01% of the vote.

Nova Scotia
In 2003 the party was not formed and did not run candidates in the election.
In 2006 the party ran 52 out of 52 candidate capturing 2.3% of the vote.

PEI
In 2003 the party was not formed and did not run candidates in the election.
In 2007 the party ran 18 out of 27 candidates capturing 3.04% of the vote.

Quebec
In 2003 the party ran 23 out of 125 candidates capturing 0.44% of the vote.
In 2007 the party ran 108 out of 125 candidates capturing 3.85% of the vote.

Manitoba
In 2003 the party ran 14 out of 57 candidates capturing 0.96% of the vote.
In 2007 the party ran 15 out of 57 candidates capturing 1.33% of the vote.

Between 2003 and 2007 the Greens in Manitoba ran only one more candidate and increased the vote % by a pittance. All of the listed Green Parties had increased in vote by large percentages and had at almost doubled or maxed the number of candidates ran. All political parties suffer from factionalism and infighting, but in Manitoba the group who won out were not remotely capable of leading the party.

So where does this leave the Greens in Manitoba? For me, the Greens in Manitoba are a political joke. While I believe that their ecological message is important, they have become irrelevant because of the socialist and activist elements that have infected the party. The current Greens are too busy dropping out of society and acting as activists to run as a political party as demonstrated by the those election results.

In future blogs, I will discuss the importance of Leadership, why the Green Party should not be a Leftist Party, and why the party needs to appeal to the Middle Class.

As I wrote in an earlier blog, I have become less enamored with Proportional Representation since my support of it between 1995-2005. I have arrived at the conclusion that representative policy is not worth a whole lot if the people implementing that policy are not capable or willing to enforce the policy. Representation is not enough as demonstrated in the corporate business world.

A modern business corporation will have departmental representation from Finance, HR, Technology, Administration, etc. It is important to have representation from each of these segments for a corporation to run effectively and to be competitive. It needs to know what is going on with its resources in its various forms (people, money, manufacturing, etc). But does having this representation guarantee that the corporation will succeed?

No. There are plenty of examples of very rich corporations who have a CEO, COO, CFO, CHRO, CTO, CAO, and Chief Whatever Officer who also spend millions in additional consulting costs and still end up losing money or going under. Thanks Enron for providing such a glorious example.

PR is no different. It ensures that everyone has a place at the table which is important for healthy functioning, but what is done once everyone is at the table returns to the realm of human relations and individual competency. We as voters are stuck because for the most part we have not developed a consistent way of knowing the quality of the people we are electing. Diversity is a worthy value to pursue, but even more so we need competent leadership.

It all comes down to this: A good leader will ignore bad policy and enforce good policy. A bad leader will ignore good policy and enforce bad policy. The good and bad policy will exist regardless of who is in power, but the quality of the leader will determine the experience of that policy. I have witnessed well-meaning but incompetent managers turn a blind eye to workplace harassment despite a well-written and comprehensive anti-harassment policy being on the books. Good policy is meaningless without enforcement. It is the same thing with governments. The best written legislation made by a PR elected government is useless if its people are incapable to actually enforce the law.

Proportional Representation is simply a fairer way of electing our governments, but it does not guarantee good government. Good government is determined by the quality of people you elect. PR would guarantee fair government in terms of electoral accountability and is really like the computer programming acronym of GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). If you have dumb, short-sighted people standing for election in all the political parties, you will end up with a dumb, short-sighted government that just so happens to be fully represented thanks to PR.

Do we need PR? Yes, but I don’t agree with Fair Vote Ontario’s 2007 Referendum Campaign recommendation for a Mixed Member List system which emphasizes too much ideological purity. An ideal voting system needs to combine aspects of fairness tempered with the ability to choose styles of personality and leadership. That is why if I was to endorse a voting system, it would be the STV (Single Transferable Vote) system. Vote for who you like according to your spectrum of affinity. It puts more control in the hands of the voter and I think would force political parties to find better candidates.

I am far less interested in a candidate who stands for a particular party, but one who demonstrate the essential skills of emotional intelligence. I hope to blog in the future about ways to tease out the competency and leadership of the people we elect.

The Green Party in Canada was established in 1980. It has contested every federal election since 1983 with the most recent result being 4.48% of the vote in the 2006 federal election when the party ran 308 candidates across the nation. It now operates in eight of the ten provinces and is part of a world-wide political movement. In 2001, the Global greens were organized as an international political movement and adopted the six guiding principles of the Global Greens Charter:

• Ecological wisdom
• Social justice
• Participatory democracy
• Nonviolence
• Sustainability
• Respect for diversity

I first became aware of the Green Party during the 1993 Canadian General Election. They were participating in a televised small parties debate. Witnessing that here were people standing for principles and knew that they had little chance of attaining any real power, I was inspired. It left an impression on me that I too would eventually get involved in politics.

In 1995, I researched all of the political parties including the smaller parties and decided to join the Greens. I found that I agreed with their values the most, particularly that everything is interconnected and that you cannot have a healthy economy without having a healthy ecology. I liked their position on Proportional Representation which became one of the main reasons behind my involvement in that movement. The philosophical and political cohesiveness energized me enough that I threw myself into helping get the Green Party established in Manitoba by:

• Helping form the provincial chapter of the Green Party of Canada in the spring of 1997.
• Helping host the 1st ever Manitoba based Green Party of Canada conference called ‘The Greens on the Red’ in the summer of 1998.
• Accepting the responsibility as founding President of the Green Party of Manitoba between November 1998 and summer 2002.
• Running as a one of six candidates in the Greens’ 1st Provincial Election in 1999.
• Assisting with the 2001 Federal and the 2003 Provincial Elections.

No single person can ever take credit for organizational creation or success. I was blessed to work with a multitude of dedicated and earnest people. During those early years, we practiced camaraderie and had fun despite our perception about the seriousness of our purpose. I remember thinking out loud that even with the environment being destroyed, us being angry and upset is not going to change anybody’s mind about the matter. We needed to use reasoning sugar-coated with humor to get our message across.

Yet despite the national rise of the Greens and the momentum that was taking place locally under the inspired leadership of Markus Buchart, I found myself becoming disenchanted with politics. In 2002 I stepped down as President and did not run again for a Council seat despite encouragement to do so. In hindsight, I had sensed that something malignant has infested the party and I did not have the energy to fight the battles that would soon take place…

Keep tuned for a future blog on what is happened to the Greens and what is happening now.

Proportional Representation is a category of electoral formula that aims to closely match the percentage of electoral votes that groups of candidates (political parties) obtain and the percentage of seats they receive in the legislature. It is a system in contrast to Canada’s plurality voting system, where disproportional seat distribution results because the voters are divided into multiple electoral districts. This results in a “winner takes all” plurality or “first past the post” election race.

Basically with proportional representation (or fair voting) the Conservative Party would get 40% of the seats if it got 40% of the votes. Currently it is common for parties in Canada to get over 50% of the seats with just 38%-42% of the total vote. A party that was not deserving of majority government status is given that privilege just because the way the votes are counted are done in an arbitrary manner. Our plurality system was not built for political parties. It was this absurd unfairness that spurred me to get involved.

In 1996, I started what I believe was the first website dedicated to Proportional Representation. The site was called Canadians for Proportional Representation and from it grew the Canada-Votes LISTSERVE. It was this email discussion group that became the meeting forum for all of the main people who formed Fair Vote Canada. I was part of the FVC’s Interim Planning Council in 2000, was later elected and served one two-year term on its board of directors until 2002.

During this time, I had been working on what I hoped would have been a business enterprise that would have earned some profit while spreading the truth about Canada’s inadequate voting system. I had created a sole proprietorship called Beacon Publishing to self-publish a book called Polls, Parties, and Power: Waste and Distortion in Canada’s Elections.

Writing and putting together the book started in April 1999 and it took me close to three and a half years of part-time effort to complete. During this time, I came to realize the futility of self-publishing in paper form and opted to publish it electronically. In August 2002, I had dissolved my company, the book was finished and electronically published via the internet. The book was promoted to people within Fair Vote Canada and some of my colleagues in the Green Party of Manitoba. I have no idea how many times it has been downloaded or read but I do know that Larry Gordon, Executive Director of Fair Vote Canada cited the work in their Dubious Democracy reports.

The eBook is little more than a collection of election result tables that are as interesting as a sports almanac for hockey. As I said in the book, “Unlike any sports championship, the political party that wins government affects all aspects of our lives. So get cozy with these statistics, they are after-all, how we elect our champions.” I had no illusion that the book was going to be much more than a statistical testimony of our voting system’s problems. The book remains available for free via download.

Polls, Parties, and Power: Waste and Distortion
in Canada’s Elections 1980-2000.
312 Pages ~ Format: PDF ~ Size: 4.86MB
Download it by right-clicking and selecting ‘Save As’.

Since the book’s release, my enthusiasm for PR has diminished. I am still a supporter of Fair Vote Canada because the principles of PR just make sense, but as you will read in a future post, PR is only one part of the formula to improve our governance.