Wait, what? There were no less than 50 productions of The Merchant of Venice in Nazi Germany during Hitler’s first six years in power. Understandably, the fuhrer saw it as a powerful tool for advancing anti-Semitism. With its portrayal of the cruel and wily Shylock, the Jewish money-lender who lusts for “a pound of [Christian] flesh,” the play in some ways encourages the worst medieval anti-Jewish stereotypes.
Not everyone sees it that way, of course. Actor Yossi Gerber, who portrayed Shylock in an earlier Israeli production of the play, says that Merchant – with its famous Shylock monologue about Jews being human like everyone else – is “anti-anti- Semitic.” Ilan Ronen, who will direct the new Habima version in London, says it “allows us to attack the hatred of Jews and fear of strangers.”
As it happens, the opponents of the new production are upset not by the choice of Merchant but by the fact that the organizers of a London-based Shakespeare festival invited an Israeli troupe to participate. According to their web site, the protesters, known as Boycott from Within, regard Israel as “evil” and “an apartheid state,” and use the Arabic word for “catastrophe,” nakba, to characterize the creation of Israel in 1948.
It would not have been a complete shock, though, if they had supported the choice of Merchant, when one notes how the Shylock slur has been used by some Arab denouncers of Israel. In a sermon last year, Muhammad Badi, leader of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, cited Shylock as revealing “the true character” of Jews, while Hafez Barghouti, editor of the Palestinian Authority newspaper Al- Hayat Al-Jedida, has described Israel as “the Shylock of the lands and settlement” and Israeli banks as “Shylockstyle banks that empty our pockets.”
American Jewish defense organizations have long been concerned about the impact of the stereotypes in The Merchant for Venice, and for good reason. Shylock references abound in American literature going back to the 19th century and even seeped into the political arena.
Just weeks after General Ulysses Grant expelled all Jewish merchants from Union-occupied areas of Tennessee, Mississippi, and Kentucky in 1862, Confederate Tennessee congressman Henry Foote declared that unless the Confederacy took similar steps, “the end of the war would probably find nearly all the property of the Confederacy in the hands of Jewish shylocks.”
As early as 1912, the Central Conference of American [Reform] Rabbis urged the College Entrance Examination Board to remove Merchant from its lists of plays “to be intensively studied” as a prerequisite to college admission. The Anti-Defamation League in 1917 launched a campaign to ban the study of Merchant in American high schools on the grounds that “Shylock is erroneously pictured as typical of all Jews.” Several hundred schools acceded to the ADL’s request.
After World War II, perhaps reflecting the fact that American Jews now felt more secure in American society, the ADL changed its position. When parents in Brooklyn in 1950 tried to force the New York City Board of Education to drop The Merchant of Venice (and Oliver Twist, with its repulsive Jewish villain, Fagin) from high school curricula, the ADL likened the effort to “book-burning.”
There is, however, a middle ground between banning a controversial play and presenting it, unvarnished, to audiences that might not appreciate the context or implications of what they are viewing. Perform the play, but have a historian speak before it begins, and have a panel discussion when it concludes. In classrooms, use The Merchant of Venice as a teachable moment, just as teachers confront issues of racial stereotyping when their students read, for example, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.
Bernard Weinraub’s hit off-Broadway play, The Accomplices, stirred its share of controversy in 2007-2010, with its frank account of President Franklin Roosevelt’s indifference to the Holocaust and the efforts by the Bergson Group activists to shake America’s conscience. I was invited to take part in a post-performance “Talkback” on stage, along with the playwright, several of the actors, and Dr. Rebecca Kook, Peter Bergson’s daughter. The discussion helped clarify historical and moral issues that the play raised.
A similar approach to The Merchant of Venice, whether in London or anywhere else, might help make the best of an otherwise bad situation.
2012年2月13日 星期一
2012年1月9日 星期一
TV Adviser on Money Offers Card
For more than a decade, Suze Orman has exhorted her viewers on CNBC to spend less than they earn, flashed her blazing smile from the covers of best-selling books and endorsed the occasional auto loan provider and brokerage firm.
Never before, however, has she built a financial product from scratch and urged her considerable number of fans to use it frequently. That changes with the introduction on Monday of her Approved card, which works a lot like a bank debit card but does not come with a checking account. It is a prepaid debit card, and companies that offer similar cards have drawn criticism for sky-high fees and poor disclosure.
The hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons, American Express and the Kardashian sisters are among those who have piled in with their own cards, and they are nearly ubiquitous at drugstores and other retailers. The target customers are most often people who have little credit history — or credit so bad that banks will not come near them.
Ms. Orman seeks to broaden the debit card market by charging low fees and offering new services, including unlimited access to credit reports. She has put more than $1 million of her own money into the venture and is prepared to add more, since the product may not break even right away. But her move also raises so many questions that it is hard to even know where to start.
How can the Approved card make money charging fees on par with those on Walmart’s cut-rate MoneyCard, while also paying a credit bureau for access to its services? Also, can it really be just fine with CNBC, where Ms. Orman has a weekly show, that her card will compete with products from companies she discusses frequently with viewers? And will her followers care that she is pushing purple pieces of plastic that will help her make money from their everyday spending?
“I couldn’t be more proud of this card if I tried,” she said. “And it doesn’t really matter what I say. It matters what happens when somebody uses this baby.”
Their choice to use it may be colored by the opportune moment in which Ms. Orman finds herself. Big banks have offended scores of consumers with new fees and account balance minimums. People seeking alternatives may well find what they are looking for in prepaid cards.
That might not have been the case several years ago, when most prepaid card issuers marketed them to teenagers, or as gifts, or to people with poor credit who needed a way to make online purchases or visit a merchant without wads of cash.
More recently, companies like Green Dot (a partner with Walmart) and NetSpend have emerged. They persuade consumers to buy the cards first, in part through their availability in 300,000 locations, including grocery and convenience stores, according to the Mercator Advisory Group. Then, they try to persuade people to reuse them. Services like direct deposit and online bill payment have helped some. Still, 43 percent of the cards are never reloaded or are reloaded only once, according to Mercator.
These cards differ from checking accounts in other ways. There is no checkbook, nor do they have their own network of A.T.M.’s, though some prepaid card issuers have agreements with networks to offer free withdrawals. And different regulators govern them, which can mean fewer consumer protections under certain circumstances.
The biggest difference from a regular bank account, however, is the fee structure on the debit cards. Prepaid-card holders must often pay to buy the card and put money on it. There is often a monthly fee. Bill paying, phone help — even making a purchase can cost a dollar or two.
Ms. Orman watched this unfold and vowed to build something better. Her fees for the Approved card for things like A.T.M. withdrawals are about as low as they come, though she was not able to fulfill her goal of avoiding a $3 monthly fee, which is deducted from the remaining balance.
Whether consumers could do better with a free checking account (and yes, plenty still exist) would depend on whether they value paper checks and in-person service. Financially, they would most likely do worse if they bounced those checks or used overdraft services and paid $20 or $30 for each transaction.
The Approved card, like most leading prepaid cards, generally does not let people spend more than they have.
But the most noteworthy part of the Approved card is Ms. Orman’s efforts to make her customers more aware of their credit histories. All users get unlimited access to their credit reports and credit scores from TransUnion, though not the more widely used FICO scores. They will also get free credit monitoring and identity theft protection.
The real question is whether any debit card can help a cardholder become more creditworthy. The three major credit bureaus — TransUnion, Equifax and Experian — generally do not use debit card spending data to determine whether someone is qualified for loans.
“There is something radically wrong here,” Ms. Orman said. “We are rewarding people for having credit and punishing people who pay in cash. I want to change that paradigm.”
So she has persuaded TransUnion to collect spending data from Approved card customers. Perhaps it will look at other companies’ data too. And in a few years, it will see whether there is any proof that prepaid debit users deserve recognition for good behavior.
Until then, this is mere vaporware. The data may prove meaningless, and even if there are patterns, TransUnion probably would not give people more than a handful of points’ worth of credit on their scores.
As for the free credit reports and such, TransUnion could raise the price Ms. Orman pays in 2013. TransUnion may simply be in this temporarily for the gold star it gets from siding with Ms. Orman and her people-first philosophy.
Never before, however, has she built a financial product from scratch and urged her considerable number of fans to use it frequently. That changes with the introduction on Monday of her Approved card, which works a lot like a bank debit card but does not come with a checking account. It is a prepaid debit card, and companies that offer similar cards have drawn criticism for sky-high fees and poor disclosure.
The hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons, American Express and the Kardashian sisters are among those who have piled in with their own cards, and they are nearly ubiquitous at drugstores and other retailers. The target customers are most often people who have little credit history — or credit so bad that banks will not come near them.
Ms. Orman seeks to broaden the debit card market by charging low fees and offering new services, including unlimited access to credit reports. She has put more than $1 million of her own money into the venture and is prepared to add more, since the product may not break even right away. But her move also raises so many questions that it is hard to even know where to start.
How can the Approved card make money charging fees on par with those on Walmart’s cut-rate MoneyCard, while also paying a credit bureau for access to its services? Also, can it really be just fine with CNBC, where Ms. Orman has a weekly show, that her card will compete with products from companies she discusses frequently with viewers? And will her followers care that she is pushing purple pieces of plastic that will help her make money from their everyday spending?
“I couldn’t be more proud of this card if I tried,” she said. “And it doesn’t really matter what I say. It matters what happens when somebody uses this baby.”
Their choice to use it may be colored by the opportune moment in which Ms. Orman finds herself. Big banks have offended scores of consumers with new fees and account balance minimums. People seeking alternatives may well find what they are looking for in prepaid cards.
That might not have been the case several years ago, when most prepaid card issuers marketed them to teenagers, or as gifts, or to people with poor credit who needed a way to make online purchases or visit a merchant without wads of cash.
More recently, companies like Green Dot (a partner with Walmart) and NetSpend have emerged. They persuade consumers to buy the cards first, in part through their availability in 300,000 locations, including grocery and convenience stores, according to the Mercator Advisory Group. Then, they try to persuade people to reuse them. Services like direct deposit and online bill payment have helped some. Still, 43 percent of the cards are never reloaded or are reloaded only once, according to Mercator.
These cards differ from checking accounts in other ways. There is no checkbook, nor do they have their own network of A.T.M.’s, though some prepaid card issuers have agreements with networks to offer free withdrawals. And different regulators govern them, which can mean fewer consumer protections under certain circumstances.
The biggest difference from a regular bank account, however, is the fee structure on the debit cards. Prepaid-card holders must often pay to buy the card and put money on it. There is often a monthly fee. Bill paying, phone help — even making a purchase can cost a dollar or two.
Ms. Orman watched this unfold and vowed to build something better. Her fees for the Approved card for things like A.T.M. withdrawals are about as low as they come, though she was not able to fulfill her goal of avoiding a $3 monthly fee, which is deducted from the remaining balance.
Whether consumers could do better with a free checking account (and yes, plenty still exist) would depend on whether they value paper checks and in-person service. Financially, they would most likely do worse if they bounced those checks or used overdraft services and paid $20 or $30 for each transaction.
The Approved card, like most leading prepaid cards, generally does not let people spend more than they have.
But the most noteworthy part of the Approved card is Ms. Orman’s efforts to make her customers more aware of their credit histories. All users get unlimited access to their credit reports and credit scores from TransUnion, though not the more widely used FICO scores. They will also get free credit monitoring and identity theft protection.
The real question is whether any debit card can help a cardholder become more creditworthy. The three major credit bureaus — TransUnion, Equifax and Experian — generally do not use debit card spending data to determine whether someone is qualified for loans.
“There is something radically wrong here,” Ms. Orman said. “We are rewarding people for having credit and punishing people who pay in cash. I want to change that paradigm.”
So she has persuaded TransUnion to collect spending data from Approved card customers. Perhaps it will look at other companies’ data too. And in a few years, it will see whether there is any proof that prepaid debit users deserve recognition for good behavior.
Until then, this is mere vaporware. The data may prove meaningless, and even if there are patterns, TransUnion probably would not give people more than a handful of points’ worth of credit on their scores.
As for the free credit reports and such, TransUnion could raise the price Ms. Orman pays in 2013. TransUnion may simply be in this temporarily for the gold star it gets from siding with Ms. Orman and her people-first philosophy.
2011年12月1日 星期四
Max Petroleum upgraded in light of recent operational news
Merchant Securities has upgraded its target price for Max Petroleum to 35.2 pence per share in order to take account of recent positive operational news.
Merchant said that good operational news released by Max on its Zhana Makat project in Kazakhstan was consistent with the independent broker’s outlook for the project. “We now expect that Zhana Makat will produce 7.7 million barrels,” said Merchant, pointing out that this figure is “only moderately higher” than independent consultant Ryder Scott’s proven and probable reserve estimate of 6.2 million barrels for the field.
After Max announced that Ryder Scott had ascribed 0.9 million barrels of proven reserves to East Kyzylzhar I in mid-November, followed by news that the KZIE-1 discovery well produced light oil at 1,484 barrels per day, Merchant is positive about this development too. It said that it believes “our 2.7 million barrel target is more likely to be exceeded than not and that Ryder Scott’s estimates of proven and probable reserves already appear out of date”.
At Sagiz West, Ryder Scott has ascribed 4.8 million barrels of proven and probable reserves and 61.3 million barrels of contingent resources in place. “We had estimated that the field would produce 16.6 million barrels,” said Merchant. “Our estimate, combined with 61.3 million barrel estimate of contingent resources in place, would imply a recovery rate of 27 per cent, which is reasonable. We are not concerned that the Ryder Scott proven and probable reserve estimate is significantly below our 16.6 million barrel estimate because Ryder Scott has limited its reserve estimate to two well offsets from the discovery well.”
Elsewhere, Merchant said that Ryder Scott’s 0.5 million barrel proven and probable reserve estimate for Borkyldakty is close to its 0.7 million barrel estimate and that it saw no reason to adjust its estimates for the field, while at the Asanketken Jurassic field it has reduced its estimate of total production to 2.1 million barrels from 2.6 million barrels. Here, the ASK-2 well has confirmed the original reservoir discovered by ASK-1, but offered no further upside so far.
An imminent catalyst for Max’s share price, added Merchant, could be the ASK-2 well results. “Based on our pre-drill estimates a successful discovery in the Triassic target could add circa 10.7 pence to our valuation,” said the broker. “We believe that the success of the Jurassic discovery made by ASK-1 (and the presence of oil in this reservoir) de-risks the lower Triassic target, which is significantly greater in prospective scale.”
Merchant said that good operational news released by Max on its Zhana Makat project in Kazakhstan was consistent with the independent broker’s outlook for the project. “We now expect that Zhana Makat will produce 7.7 million barrels,” said Merchant, pointing out that this figure is “only moderately higher” than independent consultant Ryder Scott’s proven and probable reserve estimate of 6.2 million barrels for the field.
After Max announced that Ryder Scott had ascribed 0.9 million barrels of proven reserves to East Kyzylzhar I in mid-November, followed by news that the KZIE-1 discovery well produced light oil at 1,484 barrels per day, Merchant is positive about this development too. It said that it believes “our 2.7 million barrel target is more likely to be exceeded than not and that Ryder Scott’s estimates of proven and probable reserves already appear out of date”.
At Sagiz West, Ryder Scott has ascribed 4.8 million barrels of proven and probable reserves and 61.3 million barrels of contingent resources in place. “We had estimated that the field would produce 16.6 million barrels,” said Merchant. “Our estimate, combined with 61.3 million barrel estimate of contingent resources in place, would imply a recovery rate of 27 per cent, which is reasonable. We are not concerned that the Ryder Scott proven and probable reserve estimate is significantly below our 16.6 million barrel estimate because Ryder Scott has limited its reserve estimate to two well offsets from the discovery well.”
Elsewhere, Merchant said that Ryder Scott’s 0.5 million barrel proven and probable reserve estimate for Borkyldakty is close to its 0.7 million barrel estimate and that it saw no reason to adjust its estimates for the field, while at the Asanketken Jurassic field it has reduced its estimate of total production to 2.1 million barrels from 2.6 million barrels. Here, the ASK-2 well has confirmed the original reservoir discovered by ASK-1, but offered no further upside so far.
An imminent catalyst for Max’s share price, added Merchant, could be the ASK-2 well results. “Based on our pre-drill estimates a successful discovery in the Triassic target could add circa 10.7 pence to our valuation,” said the broker. “We believe that the success of the Jurassic discovery made by ASK-1 (and the presence of oil in this reservoir) de-risks the lower Triassic target, which is significantly greater in prospective scale.”
2011年11月3日 星期四
MF Global stops liquidation, customer transfers - sources
Brokers at MF Global early on Wednesday stopped processing liquidation orders from customers and transferring accounts to other brokerages, possibly to clear the way for a bulk transfer of positions, sources at the bankrupt brokerage told Reuters.
After being allowed on Tuesday to resume limited trading solely in order to liquidate positions on behalf of their customers, two sources at MF Global told Reuters they had been told to stop that activity earlier in the day.
Separately, another broker said that MF Global customers were now also unable to transfer their accounts to another clearing party.
The stop-start effort to untangle MF Global's customer accounts after the company failed to find a buyer and filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday has frustrated clients and constricted trading in come markets.
It may be that regulators and exchanges are attempting to move customer accounts in bulk in order to free up positions more quickly, some traders said. That scenario appeared even more likely after MF Global's trustee filed in bankruptcy court for approval to transfer segregated accounts to other brokers.
A Chicago broker at MF Global, cut down by high-risk bets on European debt as it aggressively tried to transform into a mini-Goldman Sachs, said he was told by the orders clearing desk that he had to stop all liquidation of positions.
"I was told we can't do anything anymore," he said, adding that he was not certain of the reason but suspected that it was tied to the bankruptcy process underway.
On Tuesday, after a temporary freeze on all trading, MF Global was allowed to resume liquidating customers' grains and livestock positions on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and all ICE Futures USA positions.
The abrupt failure of MF Global -- which billed itself as the number one broker on the New York Mercantile Exchange and COMEX, and the second largest on the CME -- brought activity on Monday to a crawl, with most major exchanges severely limiting activity or suspending its membership.
But trading activity picked up when liquidation of positions by MF Global customers had not been as severe as some had feared, and a willingness to take risk brought customers back.
A broker at Chicago brokerage said MF Global clients were told on Wednesday morning that they would not be able to transfer their accounts to another futures commission merchant.
"It took them a couple days to figure out that they were losing money on position transfers," he added.
After being allowed on Tuesday to resume limited trading solely in order to liquidate positions on behalf of their customers, two sources at MF Global told Reuters they had been told to stop that activity earlier in the day.
Separately, another broker said that MF Global customers were now also unable to transfer their accounts to another clearing party.
The stop-start effort to untangle MF Global's customer accounts after the company failed to find a buyer and filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday has frustrated clients and constricted trading in come markets.
It may be that regulators and exchanges are attempting to move customer accounts in bulk in order to free up positions more quickly, some traders said. That scenario appeared even more likely after MF Global's trustee filed in bankruptcy court for approval to transfer segregated accounts to other brokers.
A Chicago broker at MF Global, cut down by high-risk bets on European debt as it aggressively tried to transform into a mini-Goldman Sachs, said he was told by the orders clearing desk that he had to stop all liquidation of positions.
"I was told we can't do anything anymore," he said, adding that he was not certain of the reason but suspected that it was tied to the bankruptcy process underway.
On Tuesday, after a temporary freeze on all trading, MF Global was allowed to resume liquidating customers' grains and livestock positions on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and all ICE Futures USA positions.
The abrupt failure of MF Global -- which billed itself as the number one broker on the New York Mercantile Exchange and COMEX, and the second largest on the CME -- brought activity on Monday to a crawl, with most major exchanges severely limiting activity or suspending its membership.
But trading activity picked up when liquidation of positions by MF Global customers had not been as severe as some had feared, and a willingness to take risk brought customers back.
A broker at Chicago brokerage said MF Global clients were told on Wednesday morning that they would not be able to transfer their accounts to another futures commission merchant.
"It took them a couple days to figure out that they were losing money on position transfers," he added.
2011年5月5日 星期四
Square gets backing from Visa…and adds encryption
San Francisco startup Square which makes tiny card readers for smartphones that enable virtually anyone to process credit card transactions, has received an undisclosed strategic investment from Visa. Visa is the top credit card company on the planet: Visa’s investment in Square amounts to an endorsement of Square’s technology and ideas, which were recently very publicly challenged by Verifone for suffering from a fundamental security flaw.
Launched by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey in 2009, last year Square began offering free credit card readers to merchants and individuals on very simple 2.75 percent terms, with no merchant account or other complicated banking setup required to process credit card transactions. The Square reader pops into an Android or iOS smartphone via an audio port, and Square’s application software processes the rest of the transaction. Square has signed up hundreds of thousands of individuals and businesses, and the technology is widely seen as disruptive to the broader credit card industry, which thrives on processing fees to merchants and selling expensive point-of-sale card readers for processing transactions.
Few were surprised when credit card processor VeriFone came out against Square, but the public and aggressive nature of the attack were almost unprecedented, claiming that any programmer could make an app that skimmed consumer’s credit card information. At the heart of Verifone’s complaint was that the Square reader sends creditor card data to the smartphone in an unencrypted format, making it ripe for plucking by other applications.
Square’s Jack Dorsey responded that all the information anyone needs to “skim” a card is printed on the card itself, and any technology—including paper and pen—can be used to obtain that information, and noted that partner bank JPMorgan Chase didn’t have any problem with Square’s technology.
Nonetheless, now that Visa has made an unspecified investment in Square, the company plans to add encryption to its card readers. Square COO characterizes adding encryption to the card reader not as a capitulation to Verifone, but as an adoption of best practices.
“Square complies with all current industry standards, and we are committed to meeting or exceeding industry guidelines as they evolve — all while keeping our card reader free,” Rabois wrote.
Jack Dorsey recently returned to Twitter as executive chairman; he continues to serve as CEO of Square.
Launched by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey in 2009, last year Square began offering free credit card readers to merchants and individuals on very simple 2.75 percent terms, with no merchant account or other complicated banking setup required to process credit card transactions. The Square reader pops into an Android or iOS smartphone via an audio port, and Square’s application software processes the rest of the transaction. Square has signed up hundreds of thousands of individuals and businesses, and the technology is widely seen as disruptive to the broader credit card industry, which thrives on processing fees to merchants and selling expensive point-of-sale card readers for processing transactions.
Few were surprised when credit card processor VeriFone came out against Square, but the public and aggressive nature of the attack were almost unprecedented, claiming that any programmer could make an app that skimmed consumer’s credit card information. At the heart of Verifone’s complaint was that the Square reader sends creditor card data to the smartphone in an unencrypted format, making it ripe for plucking by other applications.
Square’s Jack Dorsey responded that all the information anyone needs to “skim” a card is printed on the card itself, and any technology—including paper and pen—can be used to obtain that information, and noted that partner bank JPMorgan Chase didn’t have any problem with Square’s technology.
Nonetheless, now that Visa has made an unspecified investment in Square, the company plans to add encryption to its card readers. Square COO characterizes adding encryption to the card reader not as a capitulation to Verifone, but as an adoption of best practices.
“Square complies with all current industry standards, and we are committed to meeting or exceeding industry guidelines as they evolve — all while keeping our card reader free,” Rabois wrote.
Jack Dorsey recently returned to Twitter as executive chairman; he continues to serve as CEO of Square.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)