This discussion summarizes the significant factors affecting the consolidated
financial statements, financial condition, liquidity, and cash flows of
Healthcare Integrated Technologies, Inc, for the fiscal years ended July 31,
2022 and 2021 and the interim periods included herein. The following discussion
and analysis should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial
statements and notes included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

Executive Overview

Healthcare Integrated Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiaries is a healthcare
technology company based in Knoxville, Tennessee. We are creating a diversified
spectrum of healthcare technology solutions to integrate and automate the
continuing care, home care and professional healthcare spaces.

Our initial product, SafeSpace™ with AI Vision™, is an ambient fall detection
solution designed for continuing care communities and at home use. SafeSpace
includes hardware devices utilizing RGB, radar and other sensor technology
coupled with our internally developed software to effectively monitor a person
remotely. In continuing care communities, SafeSpace detects resident falls and
generates alerts to a centralized, intelligent dashboard without the use of
wearable devices or any action by the resident. In the home, SafeSpace detects
falls and sends alerts directly to designated individuals.

In addition to SafeSpace, we are creating a home concierge healthcare service
application to provide a virtual assisted living experience for seniors,
recently released postoperative patients, and others. The concierge application
will enable the consumer to obtain home healthcare services and health and
safety monitoring equipment to improve quality of life. We are also working to
develop a fully integrated solution for the professional healthcare community
that integrates electronic health records, remote patient monitoring,
telehealth, and other items where integration is beneficial.


Our mission is to grow a profitable healthcare technology company by focusing on
our core product, continuing the development of our proprietary software, and
developing new uses and product lines for our technology. Our management team is
focused on maintaining the financial flexibility and assembling the right
complement of personnel and outside consultants required to successfully execute
our mission.


Financial and operating results

We continue to utilize funds raised from the private sales of our common stock,
issuance of debt, and short-term advances from related parties to provide cash
for our operations, which allowed us to continue refining our initial product
and readying it for pilot testing, developing our future product offerings and
adding talented individuals to our management team. Highlighted achievements for
the fiscal year ended July 31, 2022 include:

? On August 9, 2021we exercised our option to extend the maturity date

AJB Capital Investments, LLC (“AJB-Capital“) Promissory note of August 2nd,

2021 (AJB Note 1) until February 2, 2022. Following the extension of the

maturity date, the interest rate of the note has changed from ten percent (10%)

per year to twelve percent (12%) per year during the extension period. We

did not incur any costs related to the extension. On February 9, 2022we refunded the

AJB Note 1 with proceeds of issuance of new promissory note to AJB


? On August 10, 2021we issued 1,250,000 common shares pursuant to

a Securities Purchase Agreement (“SPA”) dated April 30, 2021. Under the

initial terms of the SPA, the investor agreed to purchase 2,000,000 shares of

our ordinary shares for $200,000 at a price of $0.10 per share through a series

of payments. After receipt of $125,000 of the investor, both the Company and

the investor has mutually accepted the settlement of the SPA for the amounts received

and the issuance of shares at the agreed price per share. We engaged

no costs related to the private placement.

? On September 14, 2021we have entered into a Settlement and Variation Agreement

(the “Agreement”) with AJB-Capital for a potential Event of Default under the

Promissory note dated February 2, 2021 (the “AJB Note”) and securities

Purchase Agreement (the “PSA”) for Subsequent Equity Transactions. As

part of the settlement under the agreement, we have agreed to issue AJB-Capital a

666,666 additional shares of our common stock for payment of his $200,000

origination fee due under the terms of the original note and SPA.

? On February 9, 2022we entered into a securities purchase agreement with AJB

Capital, under which AJB-Capital purchased a promissory note (the “AJB

Note 2″) in the principal amount of $600,000 for a global purchase price

of $534,000. The AJB Note 2 bears interest at the rate of ten percent (10%)

per year and expires on February 9, 2023.

Results of Operations


We had no revenues in fiscal 2022 or 2021. Our healthcare technology business is
not currently producing revenue as we continue to develop, refine and evaluate
our products.

Selling, general and administrative expenses

The table below provides a comparison of our selling, general and administrative expenses for the years ended July 31, 2022 and 2021:

                                  For the Years Ended July 31,
                                     2022                2021          $ Variance        %Variance

Officers' salaries              $       506,443       $   531,342     $    (24,899 )              (5 )%
Stock-based compensation                473,511           621,776         (148,265 )             (24 )%
Professional fees                        94,051            97,500           (3,449 )              (4 )%
Advertising and marketing                36,535             5,297           31,238               590 %
Depreciation and amortization            11,215             8,571          
 2,644                31 %
Other                                    16,310            10,148            6,162                61 %
Total                           $     1,138,065       $ 1,274,634     $   (136,569 )             (11 )%


Officers' Salaries - Officers' salaries, net of capitalized amounts, decreased
$24,899 in 2022, or 5%. The decrease resulted from a bonus being paid to our CEO
in 2021 and a decrease in payroll tax expense in 2022 due to our CEO
compensation changing from employee to contract status.

Stock-based Compensation - Stock-based compensation expense decreased $148,265,
or 24%, from the prior year. The decrease results from a 2022 reduction in the
amortization of the grant date fair value of employee stock options granted to
our CEO and a reduction in the expense related to a restricted stock grant to
our CFO.

Professional Fees - Professional fees decreased $3,449, or 4%, over the 2021
amount. In 2022, legal fees decreased $11,594 and transfer agent and filing fees
decreased $1,797. The decrease in legal fees, transfer agent and filing fees was
partially offset by a $7,174 increase in fees paid to outside consultants,
primarily relating to marketing and branding matters, and a $3,827 increase in
accounting fees over 2021.

Advertising and marketing – Advertising and marketing expenditure increased $31,238
compared to 2021. The increase is due to the addition of a new contract of sales and marketing representatives in 2022.

Depreciation and Amortization - Depreciation and amortization expense increased
$2,644, or 31%, over the prior year. The increase results from amortization
expense related to new intangible assets placed in service in 2022, which was
partially offset by declining depreciation expense as older assets become fully
depreciated and/or disposed of.

Other – Other expenses increased $6,162or 61%, compared to 2021. The increase is mainly related to higher travel and office expenses in 2022.

Other income (expenses)

The table below presents a comparison of our other income (expenses) for the years ended July 31, 2022 and 2021:

                                  For the Years Ended July 31,
                                    2022                 2021          $ 

Deviation %Deviation

Interest expense               $      (447,623 )     $   (227,900 )   $   (219,723 )              96 %
Change in fair value of
derivative liability                   224,667             89,669          134,998               151 %
Derivative expense                           -            (97,201 )         97,201               100 %
Debt forgiveness                             -             41,931          (41,931 )             100 %
Lawsuit settlement                           -             13,110         
(13,110 )             100 %
Total                          $      (222,956 )     $   (180,391 )   $    (42,565 )              24 %

Interest Expense - Interest expense increased $219,723, or 96%, over the 2021
amount. The increase is primarily due to the amortization of debt discount and
related interest payments on the AJB Note 2 which was issued and outstanding for
six months in 2022.

Change in Fair Value of Derivative Liability - The change in the fair value of
the derivative liabilities associated with our AJB Capital notes reflects a
current year gain of $224,667 as compared to a gain of $89,669 in 2021. The
current period gain resulted from a $116,435 decrease in the fair value of the
derivative liability on the new AJB Note 2 and a $108,232 decrease in the far
value of the derivative liability of the old AJB note 1 that was retired during
the period.

Derivative Expense - Derivative expense decreased $97,201 from the same period
in the prior year. 2021 derivative expense was associated with the issuance of
the old AJB Note 1. The new AJB Note 2, issued in 2022, had no associated
derivative expense.

Debt Forgiveness - Income from debt forgiveness was $41,931 for the year ended
July 31, 2021. The income results from the forgiveness of our Small Business
Administration Paycheck Protection Program loan, plus related accrued interest,
on December 14, 2021. We had no debt forgiveness income in the year ended July
31, 2022.


Lawsuit Settlement - Income from lawsuit settlements was $13,110 for the year
ended July 31, 2021. The income results from the settlement of a lawsuit with
RBSM on May 27, 2021. We had no income from lawsuit settlements in the year
ended July 31, 2022.

Cash and capital resources

Working capital

The following table summarizes our working capital for the fiscal years ending
July 31, 2022 and 2021:

                              July 31, 2022       July 31, 2021
Current assets               $        37,667     $        49,018
Current liabilities               (3,153,778 )        (2,259,432 )

Working capital deficit ($3,116,111) ($2,210,414)

Current assets for the year ended July 31, 2022 decreased $11,351 as compared to
the year ended July 31, 2021. The decrease is due to a decrease in cash and cash
equivalents and the amortization of prepaid legal fees.

Current liabilities for the year ended July 31, 2022 increased $894,346 as
compared to the fiscal year ended July 31, 2021. The increase is primarily due
to related party accrued expenses for services under our Contract CEO Agreement,
the continuing accrual of officer's compensation and new proceeds from the AJB
Note 2.

Net cash used by operating activities

We currently do not have a revenue source and will continue to have negative
cash flow from operations for the near future. The factors in determining
operating cash flows are largely the same as those that affect net earnings,
except for non-cash expenses such as depreciation and amortization, stock-based
compensation, amortization of debt discount and changes in fair value of assets
and liabilities, which affect earnings but do not affect operating cash flow.
Net cash used by operating activities was $212,177 for the year ended July 31,
2022 as compared to $592,192 for the year ended July 31, 2021. The $380,015
decrease in cash used during 2022 is primarily attributable to a decrease in
cash payments for officer's compensation.

Net cash used by investment activities

Net cash used by investing activities was $32,690 and $60,608 for the years
ended July 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The amount is comprised of cash paid
for the filing of patent applications and for the development of software for
our internal use.

Net cash provided by financing activities

Net cash provided by financing activities was $234,475 for the year ended July
31, 2022, which represents a $351,696 decrease from the 2021 amount. The
decrease from 2021 is attributable to a $330,000 decrease in proceeds from the
sale of common stock and stock subscriptions and a $156,700 decrease in net
proceeds from the issuance of debt, which were offset by a net cash increase of
$135,004 from related party loan and repayment transactions.

At this time, we cannot provide investors with any assurance that we will be
able to obtain sufficient funding from debt financings and/or the sale of our
equity securities to meet our obligations over the next twelve months. We are
likely to continue using short-term loans from management to meet our short-term
funding needs. We have no material commitments for capital expenditures as
July 31, 2022.

Going Concern Qualification

We have a history of losses, an accumulated deficit, negative working capital
and have not generated cash from operations to support a meaningful and ongoing
business plan. Our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm has included a
"Going Concern Qualification" in their report for the years ended July 31, 2022
and 2021. The foregoing raises substantial doubt about the Company's ability to
continue as a going concern. We intend on financing our future activities and
working capital needs largely from the sale of private and/or public equity
securities with additional funding from other traditional financing sources,
including term notes, until such time that funds provided by operations are
sufficient to fund working capital requirements. There is no guarantee that
additional capital or debt financing will be available when and to the extent
required, or that if available, it will be on terms acceptable to us. The
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of this uncertainty. The "Going Concern Qualification"
might make it substantially more difficult to raise capital.


Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our consolidated financial statements and related public financial information
are based on the application of U.S. GAAP. U.S. GAAP requires the use of
estimates; assumptions, judgments and subjective interpretations of accounting
principles that have an impact on the assets, liabilities, revenues and expense
amounts reported. These estimates can also affect supplemental information
contained in our external disclosures including information regarding
contingencies, risk and financial condition. We believe our use of estimates and
underlying accounting assumptions adhere to U.S. GAAP and are consistently and
conservatively applied. We base our estimates on historical experience and on
various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the
circumstances. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions. We continue to monitor significant
estimates made during the preparation of our financial statements.

Our significant accounting policies are summarized in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements.

We believe that the following critical policies affect our most significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements.

Use of estimates

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S.
GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the
reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets
and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the
reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual
results could differ from those estimates. We base our estimates on experience
and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances. We evaluate our estimates and assumptions on a regular basis and
actual results may differ from those estimates.

Impairment of long-lived assets

Long-lived assets such as property, equipment and identifiable intangibles are
reviewed for impairment whenever facts and circumstances indicate that the
carrying value may not be recoverable. When required impairment losses on assets
to be held and used are recognized based on the fair value of the asset. The
fair value is determined based on estimates of future cash flows, market value
of similar assets, if available, or independent appraisals, if required. If the
carrying amount of the long-lived asset is not recoverable from its undiscounted
cash flows, an impairment loss is recognized for the difference between the
carrying amount and fair value of the asset. When fair values are not available,
we estimate fair value using the expected future cash flows discounted at a rate
commensurate with the risk associated with the recovery of the assets. We did
not recognize any impairment losses for any periods presented.

Intangible assets

Intangible assets consist of patents, our website and the costs of software
developed for internal use. Certain payroll and stock-based compensation costs
incurred are allocated to the intangible assets. We determine the amount of
costs to be capitalized based on the time spent by employees or outside
contractors on the projects. Intangible assets are amortized over their expected
useful life on a straight-line basis. We evaluate the useful lives of these
assets on an annual basis and test for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances occur that could impact the recoverability of these assets. If the
estimate of an intangible asset's remaining life is changed, the remaining
carrying value of the intangible asset is amortized prospectively over the
revised remaining useful life. We did not recognize any impairment losses during
any of the periods presented.


Fair value of financial instruments

Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset, or
paid to transfer a liability, in an orderly transaction between market
participants. A fair value hierarchy has been established for valuation inputs
that gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical
assets or liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. The fair
value hierarchy is as follows:

Level 1 inputs – Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity can access at the measurement date.

Level 2 Inputs - Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are
observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. These
might include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets,
quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are
not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or
liability (such as interest rates, volatilities, prepayment speeds, credit
risks, etc.) or inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by
market data by correlation or other means.

Level 3 Inputs - Unobservable inputs for determining the fair values of assets
or liabilities that reflect an entity's own assumptions about the assumptions
that market participants would use in pricing the assets or liabilities.

Financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable,
accounts payable and borrowings. The fair value of current financial assets and
current financial liabilities approximates their carrying value because of the
short-term maturity of these financial instruments.

Derivative liability

Options, warrants, convertible notes, or other contracts, if any, are evaluated
to determine if those contracts, or embedded components of those contracts,
qualify as derivatives to be separately accounted for in accordance with
Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") Accounting Standards Codification
("ASC") Topic 815, "Derivatives and Hedging," (paragraph 815-10-05-4 and Section
815-40-25). The result of this accounting treatment is that the fair value of
the embedded derivative is marked-to-market each balance sheet date and recorded
as either an asset or a liability. The change in fair value is recorded in the
consolidated statements of operations as other income or expense. Upon
conversion, exercise or cancellation of a derivative instrument, the instrument
is marked to fair value at the date of conversion, exercise, or cancellation and
then the related fair value is reclassified to equity.

In circumstances where the embedded conversion option in a convertible
instrument is required to be bifurcated, and there are also other embedded
derivative instruments in the convertible instrument that are required to be
bifurcated, the bifurcated derivative instruments are accounted for as a single,
compound derivative instrument.

The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments
should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is re-assessed at the end of
each reporting period. Equity instruments that are initially classified as
equity that become subject to reclassification are reclassified to liability at
the fair value of the instrument on the reclassification date. Derivative
instrument liabilities will be classified in the balance sheet as current or
non-current based on whether or not net-cash settlement of the derivative
instrument is expected within 12 months of the balance sheet date.

The Company adopted Section 815-40-15 of the FASB ASC ("Section 815-40-15") to
determine whether an instrument (or an embedded feature) is indexed to the
Company's own stock. Section 815-40-15 provides that an entity should use a two-
step approach to evaluate whether an equity-linked financial instrument (or
embedded feature) is indexed to its own stock, including evaluating the
instrument's contingent exercise and settlement provisions.

We use a binomial option pricing model to calculate the fair value of the derivative liability and to mark-to-market the fair value of the derivative at each reporting date. We recognize the change in the fair value of the derivative as other income or expense in the consolidated statements of earnings.


Revenue Recognition

The Company's revenue recognition policy is to recognize revenue in accordance
with ASC 606, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers." The Company follows the
five-step model provided by ASC Topic 606 in order to recognize revenue in the
following manner: 1) Identify the contract; 2) Identify the performance
obligations of the contract; 3) Determine the transaction price of the contract;
4) Allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations; and 5)
Recognize revenue. An entity recognizes revenue for the transfer of promised
goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration for
which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.
The Company's revenue recognition policies remained unchanged as a result of the
adoption of ASC 606, and there were no significant changes in business processes
or systems.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company accounts for stock-based compensation in accordance with ASC Topic
718, "Compensation - Stock Compensation" ("ASC 718") which establishes financial
accounting and reporting standards for stock-based employee compensation. It
defines a fair value-based method of accounting for an employee stock option or
similar equity instrument. The Company accounts for compensation cost for stock
option plans, if any, in accordance with ASC 718.

Stock-based payments, excluding restricted stock, are valued using a
Black-Scholes option pricing model. Grants of stock-based payment awards issued
to non-employees for services rendered have been recorded at the fair value of
the stock-based payment, which is the more readily determinable value. The
grants are amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service
periods, which is generally the vesting period. If an award is granted, but
vesting does not occur, any previously recognized compensation cost is reversed
in the period related to the termination of service. Stock-based compensation
expenses are included in cost of goods sold or selling, general and
administrative expenses, depending on the nature of the services provided, in
the consolidated statements of operations. Stock-based payments issued to
placement agents are classified as a direct cost of a stock offering and are
recorded as a reduction in additional paid in capital.

The Company recognizes all forms of stock-based payments, including stock option
grants, warrants and restricted stock grants, at their fair value on the grant
date, which are based on the estimated number of awards that are expected to

Business Combinations

We account for business combinations under the acquisition method of accounting.
The acquisition method requires that the acquired assets and liabilities,
including contingencies, be recorded at fair value determined on the acquisition
date and that changes thereafter be reflected in income (loss). The estimation
of fair values of the assets and liabilities assumed involves estimates and
assumptions that could differ materially from the actual amounts recorded. The
results of the acquired businesses are included in our results from operations
beginning from the day of acquisition.

Capital resources

We had no significant commitments for capital expenditures at July 31, 2022.

Off-balance sheet arrangements

We had no off-balance sheet arrangements July 31, 2022 or 2021.

© Edgar Online, source Previews

These 4 metrics indicate that NEXTDC (ASX:NXT) is using debt heavily Wed, 21 Sep 2022 20:18:12 +0000 Howard Marks said it well when he said that, rather than worrying about stock price volatility, “the possibility of permanent loss is the risk I worry about…and that every practical investor that I know is worried”. So it seems smart money knows that debt – which is usually involved in bankruptcies – is a very […]]]>

Howard Marks said it well when he said that, rather than worrying about stock price volatility, “the possibility of permanent loss is the risk I worry about…and that every practical investor that I know is worried”. So it seems smart money knows that debt – which is usually involved in bankruptcies – is a very important factor when you’re assessing a company’s risk. We note that NEXTDC Limited (ASX:NXT) has debt on its balance sheet. But should shareholders worry about its use of debt?

When is debt dangerous?

Generally speaking, debt only becomes a real problem when a company cannot easily repay it, either by raising capital or with its own cash flow. Ultimately, if the company cannot meet its legal debt repayment obligations, shareholders could walk away with nothing. Although not too common, we often see companies in debt permanently diluting their shareholders because lenders force them to raise capital at a ridiculous price. By replacing dilution, however, debt can be a great tool for companies that need capital to invest in growth at high rates of return. When we think about a company’s use of debt, we first look at cash and debt together.

See our latest analysis for NEXTDC

What is NEXTDC’s debt?

The image below, which you can click on for more details, shows that in June 2022, NEXTDC had A$1.06 billion in debt, up from A$783.5 million in one year. However, since it has a cash reserve of A$456.6 million, its net debt is less, at around A$602.2 million.

ASX: NXT Debt to Equity September 21, 2022

How healthy is NEXTDC’s balance sheet?

Zooming in on the latest balance sheet data, we can see that NEXTDC had liabilities of A$104.3 million due within 12 months and liabilities of A$1.17 billion due beyond. On the other hand, it had cash of A$456.6 million and A$44.3 million of receivables due within a year. Thus, its liabilities total A$777.6 million more than the combination of its cash and short-term receivables.

Of course, NEXTDC has a market capitalization of A$4.25 billion, so those liabilities are probably manageable. That said, it is clear that we must continue to monitor its record, lest it deteriorate.

We use two main ratios to inform us about debt to earnings levels. The first is net debt divided by earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), while the second is how often its earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) covers its interest expense (or its interests, for short). Thus, we consider debt to earnings with and without amortization and depreciation expense.

While we are not concerned about NEXTDC’s net debt to EBITDA ratio of 3.9, we believe its extremely low interest coverage of 1.1x is a sign of high leverage. It looks like the company is incurring significant amortization and amortization costs, so perhaps its leverage is heavier than it first appears, since EBITDA is arguably a generous metric. benefits. It seems clear that the cost of borrowing money is having a negative impact on shareholder returns lately. The good news is that NEXTDC has grown its EBIT smoothly by 54% over the last twelve months. Like a mother’s loving embrace of a newborn, this kind of growth builds resilience, putting the company in a stronger position to manage its debt. There is no doubt that we learn the most about debt from the balance sheet. But ultimately, the company’s future profitability will decide whether NEXTDC can strengthen its balance sheet over time. So if you want to see what the professionals think, you might find this free analyst earnings forecast report interesting.

Finally, a company can only repay its debts with cold hard cash, not with book profits. We must therefore clearly examine whether this EBIT generates a corresponding free cash flow. Over the past three years, NEXTDC has burned a lot of money. While investors no doubt expect a reversal of this situation in due course, it clearly means that its use of debt is more risky.

Our point of view

Neither NEXTDC’s ability to convert EBIT to free cash flow nor its interest coverage gave us confidence in its ability to take on more debt. But its EBIT growth rate tells a very different story and suggests some resilience. Looking at all the angles mentioned above, it seems to us that NEXTDC is a bit risky investment due to its leverage. Not all risk is bad, as it can increase stock price returns if it pays off, but this leverage risk is worth keeping in mind. There is no doubt that we learn the most about debt from the balance sheet. However, not all investment risks reside on the balance sheet, far from it. To this end, you should be aware of the 1 warning sign we spotted with NEXTDC.

In the end, it’s often best to focus on companies that aren’t in debt. You can access our special list of these companies (all with a track record of earnings growth). It’s free.

This Simply Wall St article is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It is not a recommendation to buy or sell stocks and does not take into account your objectives or financial situation. Our goal is to bring you targeted long-term analysis based on fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not take into account the latest announcements from price-sensitive companies or qualitative materials. Simply Wall St has no position in the stocks mentioned.

Valuation is complex, but we help make it simple.

Find out if NEXTDC is potentially overvalued or undervalued by viewing our full analysis, which includes fair value estimates, risks and warnings, dividends, insider trading and financial health.

See the free analysis

Uber and Grand Theft Auto developer succumb to hackers Mon, 19 Sep 2022 18:11:00 +0000 For the cybersecurity industry, bad things have happened in threes over the past week. First, former Twitter security chief Peiter “Mudge” Zatko warned a congressional committee about major security vulnerabilities in the company that put the personal information of millions of users at risk. On Thursday evening, Uber confirmed that it had been the victim […]]]>

For the cybersecurity industry, bad things have happened in threes over the past week.

First, former Twitter security chief Peiter “Mudge” Zatko warned a congressional committee about major security vulnerabilities in the company that put the personal information of millions of users at risk.

On Thursday evening, Uber confirmed that it had been the victim of a debilitating cyberattack in which a hacker appeared to have gained access to large parts of its internal systems. (Uber said Friday there was “no evidence” the hacker accessed sensitive user data, though cybersecurity watchers weren’t entirely convinced.)

Then, over the weekend, a hacker leaked dozens of videos that appeared to represent the first images of Take-Two Interactive’s highly anticipated. Grand Theft Auto VI video game, an unprecedented leak in the gaming industry. Take-Two Interactive confirmed the leak on Monday morning. A hacker claiming responsibility suggested he was holding additional work products for ransom.

The natural tendency is to draw some sort of drastic conclusion from this trio of cyber incursions, especially at a time when more and more employees are working from home in environments that might be more vulnerable to attack. But all three incidents have distinct differences that ultimately only reinforce each employee’s shared responsibility in combating digital dangers.

Twitter’s hubbub is mostly focused on the highest levels of management, with Zatko alleging that current CEO Parag Agrawal and former CEO Jack Dorsey neglected to implement much-needed cybersecurity upgrades. Although the company hasn’t experienced a major breach since late 2021, when a hacker exploited a software vulnerability to download data about 5.4 million users, Zatko said Twitter’s systems were unnecessarily exposed due to underinvestment in cybersecurity. (Twitter officials refuted the claims, saying Zatko’s poor performance and ineffective leadership led to his firing.)

Uber’s attack, meanwhile, appears to have come from rank-and-file employees who ignored basic cybersecurity warnings.

A hacker claiming Uber’s breach told the New York Times that they gained access to company systems after impersonating a member of the company’s IT staff and convincing a worker to provide a password. (Uber has neither confirmed nor denied this account.)

Details on the source of the Take-Two Interactive hack are also scarce, although Bloomberg games journalist Jason Schreier tweeted sunday that “the common theory is that their Slack has been compromised”.

In the wake of the hacks, a chorus of cybersecurity experts, politicians, and social media experts have come up with all sorts of solutions. Zatko suggested that the federal government, namely the understaffed Federal Trade Commission, step up oversight of companies that have lost private user data to hackers. Industry leaders have pushed for better multi-factor authentication procedures, such as requiring special hardware attached to computers to control employee access to company systems.

Everything is fine. But in the cases of Twitter (assuming Zatko is right) and Uber (assuming the alleged hacker’s comments are true), human judgment remains the greatest vulnerability.

If Twitter has truly “made little meaningful progress on core systems of security, integrity, and privacy,” as Zatko alleged in a whistleblower complaint, it’s a reflection of a management abandoned. If an Uber employee couldn’t discern the difference between a peddler and an actual IT colleague, that’s a failure of the employee and of cybersecurity management.

“General cybersecurity awareness training, penetration testing and anti-phishing education are powerful deterrents against such attacks,” said Neil Jones, director of cybersecurity evangelism at the company. Egnyte cloud security at VentureBeat. But even the best-trained among us sometimes slip up, especially when dealing with a cunning crook.

Interestingly enough, Wall Street seems to have factored hacks into its assessment of companies. Uber shares fell just 4% on Friday, against a 1% drop in the Nasdaq Composite, a fairly modest drop given the hacker’s claims of widespread infiltration. Take-Two Interactive’s stock price was unchanged at noon on Monday, mirroring the Nasdaq Composite.

Perhaps investors are realizing that there is no magic bullet to prevent all cybersecurity mistakes.

You want to send thoughts or suggestions for Technical sheet? Write to me here.

Jacob Charpentier


Wanted: The truth. South Korean authorities and TerraForm Laboratories co-founder Do Kwon issued contradictory statements over the weekend about the cryptocurrency entrepreneur’s level of cooperation following the issuance of an arrest warrant, Bloomberg reported. Do Kwon, who oversaw the $60 billion collapse of TerraUSD and Luna tokens, tweeted on Saturday that he was in “full cooperation” with government agencies. However, South Korean officials later responded that he was “obviously on the run” and refused to cooperate with investigators.

Back down. bitcoin values fell to their lowest price on Monday since June, and Ethereum has given up on its post-merger bump, largely due to fears that interest rates will continue to rise, CNBC reported. Bitcoin briefly fell below $18,500 for the first time in three months before rebounding to around $18,900 on Monday afternoon. Ethereum values ​​fell 22% last week, despite a long-awaited change on Thursday to a new, more environmentally friendly mining protocol.

A monster IPO. volkswagen expects raise around $9 billion of its initial public offering next week of a minority stake in Porsche, the Associated Press reported Monday. The German automaker is selling up to 25% of the luxury brand to help fund its adoption of electric vehicles. The company’s IPO price range is equivalent to $8.7 billion to $9.4 billion, slightly below analyst estimates that suggested Volkswagen could fetch about $10 billion.

Operational and fully operational. You’re here completed his month-long project on Monday to increase production capacity at its Shanghai assembly plant, a business delayed for months by COVID-related shutdowns in China, Reuters reported. The electric carmaker plans to produce double the number of vehicles at the Shanghai plant after the upgrades are complete, helping the company in China’s competitive electric vehicle market. Tesla plans to continue testing on parts of the upgraded assembly lines through the end of November.


If the shoe fits. Nike wants to provide Amazonnext-level delivery service to its shoe and apparel buyers. Insider reported on Monday that Nike is adopting some of the e-commerce giant’s logistics and inventory tactics, as part of an effort to meet consumer expectations for two- or three-day delivery. Nike hopes to better integrate its physical stores with its digital marketplace, speeding up product delivery through a more regional approach to shipping. This change follows similar plans adopted in recent years by walmart, Targetand Dick Sporting Goods.

From article:

[Nike’s] a larger connected inventory plan is the latest example of Amazon’s pressure on companies, even one of the biggest companies in the world, to compete on delivery speed.

“Everybody’s gotten used to Amazon,” said Brian Yarbrough, principal research analyst at Edward Jones. “Most retailers try to reduce it to two or three days. Amazon created this. Amazon does the same day now. Amazon has conditioned consumers to have much higher expectations for fast delivery times.


GIF Company Tells Europe It’s So “Cringe-Creating” Meta Should Be Allowed to Buy Itby Steve Mollman

How Figma founder and college dropout Dylan Field went from LinkedIn intern to billionaire in just a decadeby Lucy Brewster

These tech companies are accelerating permanent carbon removal to save the planet, by Lisa Held

How good are the new Apple Watch Ultra and iPhone 14?by Zijia Song and Bloomberg

Choco Taco’s Last Hurray Will Be a Digital Scavenger Huntby Chris Morris

The United States is late for a radical change in its cybersecurity strategy, but change is finally comingby Andrew Rubin


Better call Clearview. Dystopian facial recognition technology has finally worked in the criminal defense bar’s favor, though a single case may not be enough to save its reputation. The New York Times reported Sunday that a Southwest Florida defense attorney used AI Clearview products to identify a crucial witness in a driving homicide case, whose testimony ultimately led prosecutors to drop felony charges against a man wrongly accused of causing a fatal accident. Police working at the scene captured video of the witness, who pulled the accused from the passenger seat of the car, but they did not write down his name or contact details. After months of research, a defense attorney tapped Clearview AI — best known for providing law enforcement and businesses with access to databases with billions of faces — to see if their technology could trace the witness through his appearance in the video. Sure enough, the defense attorneys had ID on the witness within seconds of accessing the tool. Clearview AI said it would now allow public defenders to use its products, but the company’s critics said the technology was still a major privacy invasion.

This Week’s South Florida Deals Sheet (September 9, 2022) Wed, 14 Sep 2022 00:04:49 +0000 Real estate mogul Jeffrey Soffer acquired a North Miami-based marina on Monday for $10.1 million. Real estate mogul Jeffrey Soffer has acquired a North Miami marina for $10.1 million. Soffer’s Fontainebleau Development has purchased PowerHouse Marina from an entity managed by David Marcus, report The Real Deal and the South Florida Business Journal. Records show […]]]>

Real estate mogul Jeffrey Soffer acquired a North Miami-based marina on Monday for $10.1 million.

Real estate mogul Jeffrey Soffer has acquired a North Miami marina for $10.1 million. Soffer’s Fontainebleau Development has purchased PowerHouse Marina from an entity managed by David Marcus, report The Real Deal and the South Florida Business Journal.

Records show the one-acre site had previously been sold in 1995 for $912,500. The site, a two story building, is approximately 10K SF and was originally delivered in 1967. Property records also show that there is a boat repair yard on the site. Soffer, which over the past year has focused on expanding its residential portfolio, has an ongoing project with lead developer Related Group. The two giant development homes are in the construction phase for Las Carreras, a 642-unit building in Hialeah.


Lincoln Property Co. is the new owner of the Manor Broken Sound resort in Boca Raton after the company acquired the property from Related Group and Rockpoint for $194 million, The Real Deal reported. The 297-unit multi-family complex sits on 11.5 acres at 5400 Broken Sound Blvd. inside Park at Broken Sound – a 700-acre park, residential and commercial community.

Related Group and Rockpoint purchased the Manor Broken Sound site in 2019 for $20 million and recently delivered the building. This was the first major multi-family development project in Boca Raton for Related Group. The development is made up of six buildings with 261 apartments and six villas which each have six separate units. One-bedroom to three-bedroom apartments are available for rents between $2,893 and $5,587, according to the building’s listings online. The deal is about $650,000 per unit.


PEBB Enterprises and Banyan Development have sold a Boynton Beach mall for $33 million. The mall anchored in 70K SF, Sprouts has been purchased by West Parkway Realty LLC, Commercial Observer reports. Other tenants at 6405 Boynton Beach Blvd. include F45 Gym, Crown Wine & Spirits, GoodVets, Capitol Carpet & Tile stores and AT&T. PEBB and Banyan also joined forces in May to purchase a 309K SF research and office park for $37.5 million from Florida Atlantic University.


Seven companies have signed office leases at Doral Center, the two-building office complex located at 8750 Northwest 36th St. and 3750 Northwest 87th Ave. owned by Banyan Street Capital and Independencia Asset Management, reports the South Florida Business Journal.

The Florida Department of Revenue signed a deal for nearly 29K SF and was represented by CBRE. New tenants at Doral Center include Mercury Air Cargo, which leased 5,429 square feet; general contractor Waypoint Contracting, which leased 3,841 square feet; Silver Bullet Technologies, a local software logistics company, leased 3,688 square feet; Just Insurance Brokers leased nearly 3,530 square feet; architecture and design firm Ware Malcomb leased 3,221 square feet; and Sunlight Foods nabbed 1,353 SF. Banyan Street and Independencia paid $43 million two years ago for the two buildings. One Doral Center was built in 1985 and Two Doral was built in 1991.


Rental home management company Belong joins the migration train and secure office space in Brickell. The California-based company has signed a 7K SF deal at 80 SW Eighth St., company co-founder Owen Savir told TRD. While the space for this tower is being built, the management company’s 20 employees are occupying temporary space at 800 Brickell Drive. More employees are expected to transition from California to Miami in the coming weeks. Belong has approximately 300 employees across the country. Investors in the company include Andreessen Horowitz, GGV Capital and Battery Ventures.


A subsidiary of Miami developer DiFalco Group has secured $34.2 million in construction financing to develop new apartments on a 5.4-acre site south of Miami. Abanca USA, an American subsidiary of a Spanish bank, lends GP SW 248 Land LLC, headed by Christophe DiFalco. His company, which acquired the site for $4.4 million last year, was recently given the go-ahead to develop 206 apartments and six townhouses.

What CBI ‘found’ in the NSE roommate scam case Mon, 12 Sep 2022 04:02:41 +0000 New Delhi: The owner and promoters of OPG Securities – the Delhi-based brokerage firm at the center of the colocation scam case at the National Stock Exchange (NSE) – deleted crucial evidence, including their conversations and emails with employees of NSE, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is probing alleged stock market manipulation, found. […]]]>

New Delhi: The owner and promoters of OPG Securities – the Delhi-based brokerage firm at the center of the colocation scam case at the National Stock Exchange (NSE) – deleted crucial evidence, including their conversations and emails with employees of NSE, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is probing alleged stock market manipulation, found.

Agency sources told ThePrint that between 2010 and 2014, Sanjay Gupta – owner of OPG Securities and one of the main defendants in the case – and his co-defendant used a secondary server intended for emergencies to obtain “preferential access to NSE data”, which gave them a advantage over other brokers.

Gupta, who was stopped in the case in June of this year, had also reportedly hired software engineers Aman Kokrady and Vivek Goenka to develop the software they used to connect to the server.

These findings were recorded in CBI’s supplemental indictment which was filed on August 19. Apart from Gupta, Kokrady and Goenka, the indictment names Abhilasha Kukreja, a data analyst at OPG, and former chief executive and managing director of NSE, Chitra Ramkrishna, agency sources said.

ThePrint contacted OPG Securities by email and telephone, but no response was received prior to the publication of this report. The report will be updated once the response is received.

In its indictment, the CBI allegedly claimed that NSE data center staff helped OPG gain access to the company’s backup servers between 2010 and 2014, giving it an unfair advantage over other brokers, who do not could only access the main NSE servers.

The backup servers, being for emergencies only, had “no load,” allowing better and faster access to market feed and resulting in unwarranted gains for Gupta’s company, sources said.

“OPG Securities had all-day access to the secondary server, which is otherwise a backup and intended only for emergencies, such as when the primary server distributing the data goes down,” a source told ThePrint, adding, “But as OPG was the only one connected to the secondary server, they get the data faster due to low load, giving them an unfair advantage. For this service, they had paid bribes to NSE employees. »

The source further said that investigators found that the company deleted numerous records of communication with NSE employees – all crucial evidence in the case. Some of the deleted evidence was recovered from devices seized during the investigation, the source added.

The agency also found that when the NSE switched to a “multicast server from a unicast server”, OPG “stopped working as well”.

A unicast server is a server where information can be broadcast from a single source while a multicast server broadcasts information from multiple sources.

Read also : Secret phone tapping of the ESN or “financial fraud”? Inside the story of an emergency case that trapped a former IPS officer

Inequitable access, split-second advantage

The NSE roommate scam concerns allegations that date back a decade. The CBI first filed an FIR in connection with the scam in 2018. In its first indictment in April, the CBI appointed Chitra Ramkrishna and former NSE COO Anand Subramanian. The agency had stopped Subramanian in February and Ramkrishna in March as part of the case.

A co-location setup allows the broker’s computer to be located in the same area as where the exchange’s server is located. This gives a speed advantage of about ten times that of other brokers.

According to CBI sources, Gupta bribed NSE employees to gain unfair access to NSE’s colocation facility between 2010 and 2014, in order to give his company that advantage.

Sources claim that until 2014, information was disseminated by the NSE server to brokers attached to the colocation facility via a tick-by-tick (TBT) based system architecture.

In this architecture, data was released in a “sequential” fashion, and the broker who first connected to the exchange server received ticks – i.e. market feed – before the one who s logged in later.

The alleged inequitable access to this co-location facility meant that Gupta’s OPG Securities could connect to the secondary server first and get the data before anyone else.

“[This] enabled faster split-second access to the NSE data feed,” the source said, adding that even a fraction of a second faster access could result in huge gains for a stock trader.

Gupta also allegedly bribed NSE data center staff to provide him with information about what time the exchange’s servers were on, resulting in illegal gains for his company, agency sources said. .

(Edited by Uttara Ramaswamy)

Read also : Preferential Access, Split-Second Information Advantage: How NSE Servers Were “Compromised for Gain”

How to work with long documents in Google Docs Wed, 07 Sep 2022 20:37:00 +0000 Andy Wolber/TechRepublic Navigation techniques, writing time, and the need for related content and collaboration can all differ when working with long Google Docs. With a file of a few hundred words, it takes little time to scroll through it from start to finish. With a long Google document, however, scrolling may not be the best […]]]>
Andy Wolber/TechRepublic

Navigation techniques, writing time, and the need for related content and collaboration can all differ when working with long Google Docs. With a file of a few hundred words, it takes little time to scroll through it from start to finish. With a long Google document, however, scrolling may not be the best way to navigate.

Many short files are short-term projects, started and completed in minutes, hours, or days rather than the weeks, months, or years you might work on a long Google Doc.

Often, short Google Docs stand on their own, with no need for other files, while some long Google Docs rely on folders full of references and relevant source documents. Also, you might want to collaborate with people for a particular piece of content in a long Google Doc, rather than sharing access to your main file as you would with a short Google Doc.

SEE: Google Workspace vs. Microsoft 365: A Side-by-Side Analysis with Checklist (TechRepublic Premium)

The sections below cover how to organize folders and files, apply styles for easier structure and navigation, link to locations in a document and related files, share access to a specific folder or file and prepare your work for final review.

How to Organize Files in Google Drive

For larger projects that may involve multiple parties, create a new folder on Google Drive. Within this folder, you can create additional folders to hold files relevant to part of your project. For example, a recent project I worked on looked in depth at six different software solutions. So I created a folder for each vendor containing a Google Doc for notes, a separate Google Doc for my draft, a Google Sheet to track feature details, and a recorded video of a Google Meet demo meeting.

In the main project folder, create a new Google Doc for your project. Give your Doc a name that ensures you’ll recognize the file quickly and easily. If there is a deadline associated with the project, you can indicate it in the name. For example, a file named MajorWritingProject-20221130 subtly reinforces that you must complete your work by the end of November 2022.

Select your project folder on Google Drive, then select the three-dot menu and choose Add to Stars. Do the same for the main Google Doc of your project. This way you can quickly access your project files by going to Google Drive | Favorites, in the left menu, as shown in Figure A.

Figure A

Enable your project folder and master file for quick access in Google Drive and Google Docs.

Structural Sections

As you work, apply paragraph styles to provide structure to sections of text. Styles distinguish between headings (eg, Heading, Subheading), headings (eg, Heading 1, Heading 2, Heading 3), and regular text. The system relies on these styles to automatically create a document outline, which you can access from View | Show outline. Once active, the outline icon provides a quick way to not only display sections of text, as shown in Figure Bbut also allows you to click or tap on a listed section to go directly to the corresponding content.

In my opinion, Google gives you at least five different ways to apply styles when you write. I consider this a strong signal that you should use styles, as shown in Figure B. For example, here are five different ways to enter title text 2.

  • Select the text, then click or tap the arrow to the right of the Regular Text menu item and select Heading 2.
  • Select the text, then Format | Paragraph Styles | Apply section 2.
  • Type @heading, which brings up a menu in the document from which you can select and apply any of the heading options.
  • Select some text, then press a keyboard shortcut: Ctrl+Alt+2 on Windows and ChromeOS or Command+Option+2 on macOS.
  • With Markdown enabled (Tools | Preferences | Auto-Detect Markdown), start a line of text with ## followed by a space. The next text entered will be in the Heading 2 style.

Variations of each allow you to enter the full range of normal titles, headings, and text styles.

Figure B

Apply styles in a Google Doc, then use View | Show outline. You can click or tap the text in the outline to jump to that section of the document.

Link to quickly access a location or file

To quickly jump to a specific location in a Google Doc, place the cursor over a point in the text, then choose Insert | Menu system bookmark. You can also type @bookmark followed by the Enter or Return key. This adds a bookmark indicator next to your text, as shown in Figure C.

Click or tap the bookmark, then select the copy icon to place the link to the bookmark on your clipboard. You can then paste that link somewhere else. For example, you can paste this link at the top of your document to quickly access the bookmark by following the link.

You can also insert a link to other items stored on Google Drive for quick access to a related file. Type @ followed by part of a file or folder, then select the file or folder from the Google Drive list displayed when displayed. The system inserts a small icon that indicates a folder or file type along with the item name, as shown in Figure C. Hover your cursor over the icon or name, then click or tap the file name to open the file.

Figure C

Type the @ key in a Google Doc to bring up a menu that lets you insert a bookmark or link to a file or folder.


In Google Drive, select a folder or file followed by the Share button, enter collaborator email addresses, and adjust the permission level (i.e. Reader, Commenter, or Editor) as desired. Remember the previously suggested subfolders for specific parts of your project? You can share access to an entire folder to give collaborators access to every item in it. Or, instead, you can share access to a single Google Doc. For projects with logical segments, a careful folder and file structure allows you to collaborate with different people on different parts of your project.

Although it may be increasingly rare, some people still prefer to review and annotate printed pages. Select File | Layout | Pages to configure your document for print output. Once in this mode, you can use Insert | Page numbers for various numbering options. See How to Add Page Numbers and Bookmarks in Google Docs for details. Select File | Print to print your Doc on a printer.

Final exam

When you think your document is almost done, select Tools | Spelling and grammar | Spelling and grammar check. This can find many potential errors or omissions in your document. Be sure to investigate and correct identified issues.

Additionally, you can also use the search function (Ctrl+F on Windows or ChromeOS, Command+F on macOS) to search for words or terms that you want to make sure are used consistently. For example, the terms multifactorial and multifactorial are both widely used in technology publications such as this one. A search can help you find terms in your document to ensure consistency. In long documents, you may identify several terms that deserve similar consideration and standardization.

What is your experience ?

Have you used any of the strategies above when working with long documents in Google Docs? What other techniques have helped you manage larger writing projects with Google Docs? Do you regularly use styles with the outline tool to organize and navigate sections of your file? Mention me or send me a message on Twitter (@awolber) to let me know how you work with larger writing projects in Google Docs and Google Drive.

Two goals in 3:55 Spark Men’s Soccer to Victory over Long Island Rivals Sat, 03 Sep 2022 22:33:25 +0000 STONY BROOK, NY— After 72 minutes of scoreless play in both teams’ conference openers, Stony Brook’s men’s soccer team quickly earned all three points to win, scoring twice in 3:55 to defeat Hofstra 2- 1 in the first Battle of Long Island since the Seawolves joined CAA this summer. Amit Magoz scored […]]]>

STONY BROOK, NY— After 72 minutes of scoreless play in both teams’ conference openers, Stony Brook’s men’s soccer team quickly earned all three points to win, scoring twice in 3:55 to defeat Hofstra 2- 1 in the first Battle of Long Island since the Seawolves joined CAA this summer.

Amit Magoz scored his first goal in a Seawolves uniform, as the Israeli midfielder slid in to fire in a rebound on the head of Jonas Bickus it made the Seawolves 1-0.

The hosts quickly doubled the advantage, as Selcuk Kahveci and Kameron Blaise combined for a 1-2 move that Blaise slotted home under Hofstra’s keeper to give Stony Brook the cushion he needed to walk away with all three points.

Hofstra recovered one late from a header at the far post, but that was the only blemish on an otherwise strong day in net for Curtis Copenhagenwho recorded four saves, including a pair of fingertip saves that kept Pride off the board until the 89th minute.


  • After one goal in his first two seasons, Blaise scored twice in as many games to tie for the team lead in the category. This afternoon’s tally is also his first career game-winning goal.
  • Kahveci also has points in back-to-back games, registering the assists on both of Blaise’s goals this week. The pair also connected in Monday night’s 4-1 win over Saint Peter’s.
  • Bickus recorded a point for the second contest in a row, flicking a header on the frame that would eventually be finished by Magoz. He has five points in three games this season and 13 for his career.
  • Magoz scored his first goal in a Seawolves uniform on his only shot of the contest.
  • Birgisson’s assist is his first in 2022 and the eighth in his career. He has just completed a campaign of five assists in 2021, the most in the squad.
  • Five of Stony Brook’s six goals have come in the second half this season, with Bickus’ Monday night opener against Saint Peter’s being the only exception.


“We talked about the conference game and how the goal every time is to get points and I’m really happy that we were able to do that today. The way we started the game I think that we played really well. Our goal was to get in behind them. We know they’re a physical team and they play a physical style. I thought we were starting to get a bit tired as the mid- The clock was ticking on and we allowed them into the game, but overall I think we defended well. “We scored two good goals and were able to put them under pressure. I would have liked to have had the clean sheet with us until 2-0 late. Overall, I’m happy with the performance. We had guys who came off the bench and gave good performances so it was overall a good team win.” – head coach Anatole Ryan.

The Seawolves return to the field on Tuesday, taking on Columbia in a non-conference game at 7 p.m. in New York, before returning to league play on Saturday with a road trip to Elon.

For an overview of Stony Brook’s men’s soccer program, be sure to follow him on Facebook, Twitter and instagram.

The Relationship Between Valuations and CEO Composition May Surprise You Fri, 02 Sep 2022 12:44:00 +0000 Valuations may be starting to fall, but founders need not worry yet. After all, valuations aren’t everything. Over the past two years, the value of private companies has skyrocketed, but that didn’t necessarily mean founders were making more money. In fact, sometimes they earn less. Data from J. Thelander Consulting, collected from more than 2,000 […]]]>

Valuations may be starting to fall, but founders need not worry yet. After all, valuations aren’t everything.

Over the past two years, the value of private companies has skyrocketed, but that didn’t necessarily mean founders were making more money. In fact, sometimes they earn less.

Data from J. Thelander Consulting, collected from more than 2,000 private companies, shows that over the past three years, the median total amount of cash CEOs have actually taken home fall when a company’s valuation has dropped from $90 million to $130 million (total cash is the combination of base salary and bonus). Meanwhile, these CEOs have also given up on greater stakes in the company in 2021 and 2022 as their company valuations increase.

Here is an overview:

It’s not a perfect rule: total cash largely recovered when valuations rose above $200 million. But the data serves as an important reminder, especially now – when valuations are at the start of a decline – that valuations don’t necessarily translate into financial success.

“As the market shows, valuations are subjective and not a reliable barometer for determining compensation,” Jody Thelander, CEO and founder of J.Thelander Consulting, told me in an email.

That being said, the financing rounds do tend to be a strong indicator of a pay rise – and the checks VCs have written have gotten smaller.

CEOs and senior executives always get a financial boost after companies get more funding from venture capitalists. “In all cases, the total cash flow of founders and non-founders increases as funding increases,” says Thelander.

A fall in valuations might not have a drastic impact on CEO pay. A significant drop in funding could very well do that.

In general, pay has increased for CEOs and top performers since 2020 as companies struggled to retain talent and used everything from base pay, equity and bonuses to retain them, according to Thelander. .

Will this continue? It’s hard to tell when companies are laying off en masse. At the same time, the unemployed do not seem to have much difficulty finding a new job.

A programming note… On Labor Day, you won’t get a term sheet in your inbox on Monday. Take advantage of the long weekend and see you in a few days.

Until there,

Jessica Mathews
Twitter: @jessicakmathews
Submit an offer for the Term sheet newsletter here.

Jackson Fordyce curated the deals section of today’s newsletter.


Alloya New York-based identity decision platform for banks and fintechs, raised an additional $52 million in funding. Lightspeed Venture Partners and Future Growth led the round and were joined by investors, including Canapi Ventures, Bessemer Venture Partners, Passionate companiesand Felicis Ventures.

A signala San Mateo, Calif.-based customer engagement platform raised $50 million in Series C funding. BAM elevation led the round and was joined by investors including Agile partners, SignalFireand Zach Coelius.

EVIDENCEa Los Angeles-based NFT-based podcast and event platform, raised $50 million in Series A funding. A16z encryption led the round and was joined by investors including seven seven six, real companies, Collaboration+Currency, CAD Flamingo, Angel S.V.and Vayner Fund.

Fairmarkita Boston-based automated procurement platform, raised $35.6 million in Series C funding. OMERS Growth Stocks led the round and was joined by investors including GGV Capital, Insight Partners, HighlandXand ServiceNow.

Landaa New York-based real estate investment firm, raised $25 million in Series A funding. NFX, 83Northand Viola Ventures invested in the round.

Apricitya London-based virtual fertility clinic, raised €17 million ($16.91 million) in Series B funding. MTIP led the round and was joined by Iris Ventures.

Learnsofta San Diego-based learning and talent platform, raised $16.7M in Series A funding led by Partners from elsewhere.

FX Hedge Poola London and New York-based peer-to-peer matching platform for foreign exchange transactions, raised $8m in Series A funding. iVenture Partners Information led the round and was joined by investors including Fidelity International Strategic Businesses and NAdventures.

beauty adwoaa Dallas-based beauty brand, raised $4 million from Pendulum.

Haru Investa Singapore-based digital asset management platform, raised $4 million in funding under the leadership of Cocone Corporation’s Executive Chairman Chun Yang Hyun.

PsycAppsa London-based mental health video game developer, has raised £1.5 ($1.73m) in seed funding from Morningside Ventures.


CIVC Partners acquired a majority stake in OTR transportation, a Chicago-based freight broker. Financial terms were not disclosed.

Fortis Solutions Groupa fund holding company managed by Harvest Partnersacquired Digital Dogma Corp., a label, shrink sleeve, and digital packaging manufacturer based in Santa Fe Springs, California. Financial terms were not disclosed.

– A subsidiary of HIG Capital acquired CPS Building Services, a mechanical and electrical service provider based in Cambridgeshire, UK. Financial terms were not disclosed.

PayrHealthsupported by Osceola Capitalacquired Supero Healthcare Solutions, an Austin-based provider registration and accreditation company. Financial terms were not disclosed.

– Funds advised by SK Capital Partners and Edgewater Capital Partners agreed to acquire the scintillation and photonic crystal businesses of Saint Gobain, a Hiram, Ohio-based crystal supplier for radiation detection applications. Financial terms were not disclosed.

Security technical servicesa portfolio company of LLCPacquired CEPA operations, an Ontario, California-based provider of regulatory certification services for controlled-environment equipment for pharmaceutical and healthcare facilities. Financial terms were not disclosed.


Grill acquired a majority stake in Magneto & Diesel Holdingsa distributor and remanufacturer of diesel engine replacement parts and components based in Humble, Texas, from Warren Equity Partners. Financial terms were not disclosed.


Novo Nordisk agreed to acquire Form Therapeutica rare blood disorder and sickle cell disease treatment company based in Watertown, Mass., for approximately $1.1 billion.

Map acquired Capdesk, a London-based equity management platform. Financial terms were not disclosed.

HTEC acquired Mistral Technologies, a product development software company based in Sarajevo, Bosnia. Financial terms were not disclosed.

instagram acquired Insight, a Palo Alto-based pricing and promotions platform for CPG brands and retailers. Financial terms were not disclosed.

Measurable acquired WegoWise, a Santa Barbara, CA-based software platform for utility data automation and residential real estate. Financial terms were not disclosed.

smart sheet acquired Outfit, a Brisbane-based brand management, template building and creative automation platform. Financial terms were not disclosed.


Venture Chantsa San Francisco-based venture fund, has raised $50 million for a third fund focused on pre-seed and seed investments in climate, TechBio, aerospace and energy startups computer science.


AE Industry Partnersa Boca Raton, Florida-based private equity firm promoted Tyler Rowe in the main and Austen Dixon, Graham Kantorand Eugene Kim to the vice president.

CenterOak Partnersa Dallas-based private equity firm, has hired Marc Langer as general manager. He used to be with Heartwood Partners.

Founders Funda San Francisco-based venture capital firm, has hired Sam Blonde as a partner. He used to be with Brexit.

GICa London-based alternative asset manager, has hired Andrea Serra as Head of Europe for ICG Strategic Equity. She used to be with black stone.

Dicker Data embarks on $50 million capital raise amid rising earnings Tue, 30 Aug 2022 00:46:00 +0000 David Dicker (Dicker Data) Credit: Dicker Data ASX-listed retailer Dicker Data saw revenue jump 36.5% to $1.45 billion for its 2022 half as it seeks to raise $50 million to expand its Kurnell warehouse and increase capacity. balance sheet flexibility. During the first half of 2022, Dicker Data’s pre-tax earnings (EBITDA) increased 19.5% to $61.2 […]]]>

David Dicker (Dicker Data)

Credit: Dicker Data

ASX-listed retailer Dicker Data saw revenue jump 36.5% to $1.45 billion for its 2022 half as it seeks to raise $50 million to expand its Kurnell warehouse and increase capacity. balance sheet flexibility.

During the first half of 2022, Dicker Data’s pre-tax earnings (EBITDA) increased 19.5% to $61.2 million and net income also increased 7% to $34.3 million .

The increase in revenue was partly attributed to Dicker’s acquisition of New Zealand’s Exeed, which added $192 million in revenue in the first half.

“We continue to exceed expectations, despite the headwinds caused by supply chain and logistics disruptions,” said Chairman and CEO David Dicker.

RadNet Stock: Risk Premia to Provide Risk-Adjusted Alpha (NASDAQ: RDNT) Sun, 28 Aug 2022 12:00:00 +0000 simonkr/E+ via Getty Images Summary of investments After a strong 2nd quarter, RadNet, Inc. (NASDAQ:RDNT) continued its longer-term operating trends and injected significant amounts of cash into and below the bottom line. RDNT presents with the desirable equity premiums that investors pay a premium for FY22. We believe it is well positioned to benefit from […]]]>

simonkr/E+ via Getty Images

Summary of investments

After a strong 2nd quarter, RadNet, Inc. (NASDAQ:RDNT) continued its longer-term operating trends and injected significant amounts of cash into and below the bottom line. RDNT presents with the desirable equity premiums that investors pay a premium for FY22. We believe it is well positioned to benefit from industry tailwinds in the Covid-19 rebound, and given its offering in medical imaging, it is well differentiated in the healthcare space. health.

Imaging is linked to a multitude of medical and paramedical fields which extract innumerable sources of income. It is also a need for specialized medical treatment in almost all cases, and remains about as defensive as possible. Valuations suggest it is currently fair and reasonably priced, which is conducive to opening or re-allocating RDNT to equity risk. On this point, we rate RDNT as a buy.

Exhibit 1. RDNT 6 month price action

Stocks have caught a bid since July and climbed back above key moving averages, indicating market psychology around the stock

6-Month RDNT Price Action

Data: Refinitiv Eikon

The strength of Q2 earnings in full view

Second-quarter earnings were strong, with gains above consensus at the high and low levels. Revenue was $354 million, up about 610 basis points, including recorded revenue from its AI segment. Imaging center revenue printed $352 million, up about 570 basis points year-on-year. As shown in Table 2, growth was seen in most operating segments, with a particular increase in workers’ compensation and commercial insurance. Meanwhile, software revenue fell about 600 basis points year-over-year, while management fee revenue was flat year-over-year.

Chart 2. Growth shown across a broad spectrum of the portfolio, with single-digit declines in small segments.

Q2 FY22 RDNT revenue

Data: RDNT Q2 FY22. Image: HB Insights US Equity Strategy

RDNT speaks in terms of Adjusted EBITDA (non-GAAP) as a measure of business performance, and it printed $51.3 million at that level including losses from its AI segment, compared to $56.6 million. dollars for FY21. On closer inspection, we believe this is a fair measure, with a few exceptions. The company reduced its stock-based compensation expense by approximately 47% year-over-year to $4.7 million, although it recognized approximately $4.85 million in additional non-cash amortization charges . It also elected to expense a $6.3 million gain on the fair value of its interest rate swaps.

As shown in Table 3, this figure is significantly higher than in the second quarter of FY21, due to the swap pricing mechanics tilting in favor of RDNT over its counterparty. To explain, from ~FY19 to Q1 FY21, the company had a large outflow related to being swap downside. However, as one-month LIBOR and SOFR have tipped higher, this now favors RDNT in each of its swap deals. It has $100 million of floating rate exposure at 1.96% and an additional $400 million at 2.05%, maturing in October 2022 and October 2025 respectively. Each of them is now in the money. RDNT is now receiving payment from each of its counterparty swaps, as per the second quarter earnings call. Treating SBC as an expense in both periods and removing the loss on debt restructuring from FY21 results, we see non-GAAP EBITDA of $47 million in the second quarter of FY22, compared to $41.6 million in the second quarter of FY21.

Piece 3.

RadNet Q2 FY2022 Expenses

Data: RDNT 10-Q Q2 FY2022

Drilling down into specific operational data, the results show that growth trends have been positive over the 12 months. Routine imaging fueled the bolus of procedure volumes, nearly 2.3 million in total. MRI and CT volumes increased by 770 bps and 700 bps, respectively, while PET volume increased by 10.4% year-on-year. Considering all imaging segments, volumes gained approximately 450 bps year-over-year. The increase in numbers caused accounts receivable to be mismatched against revenue reported for FY21, with accrued liabilities on trade accounts increasing by $31 million to $166 million.

Despite the increase, the number of days pending sales (“DSO”) declined to near-record levels for the company at approximately 39 days at the end of the second quarter of FY22. The improved result adds to an already impressive negative cash conversion cycle of 39 days. Translated, this means that RDNT is paid on average about 40 days before performing the revenue-related service. With a large portion of its income coming from insurance, workers’ compensation and health insurance, this ensures that the company will continue to enjoy favorable payment terms, being paid before the end of service in mean.

Therefore, operating metrics remain an attractive feature for RDNT. As shown in Exhibit 4, the company continues to hold the Maginot Line with its operating margin and pushed $28.7 million [$0.50/share] in FCF below net income in Q2 FY22. Despite the FCF yield shrinking in recent periods, this has happened while RDNT’s return on investment has remained buoyant, as shown in Figure 5. This has allowed the firm to invest capital at an annualized return of around 8.25%, a step above its WACC of 8.1%. RDNT therefore brings a fundamental dynamic to the forward-looking regime, which interests us in the context of our US equity strategy.

Piece 4.

RDNT Stock Quarterly Mining Walkthrough

Data: RDNT SEC filings; HB Insights

Figure 5. Return on investment trends remain dynamic, even seasonal.

The results show that RDNT’s efforts to develop NOPAT sequentially since FY15. Its acquisition and growth strategy allows it to invest capital at ~2% per quarter [~8.25% annualized] on average – in line with its WACC of 8.1%.

RadNet Quarterly Capital Return Summary

Image and Data: HB US Equity Strategy


We got a respective upside in H2 FY22, tilting exposure to names that offer tangible sources of value in valuation. This includes [aside from DCF valuation, but this is sensitive to rates at present] cash flow and book value/tangible book value. RDNT has a negative tangible book value of equity, however, the percentage of assets, goodwill and intangible assets remains below 40%, as shown below.

This is attractive to us, compared to companies with similar business models in acquisitions and opening sites de novo, goodwill often skews the balance sheet. We believe that the company continues to pay reasonable prices for its acquisitions, given the percentage of goodwill it records on the balance sheet.

Exhibit 6. RDNT EX15–T2 EX22 Asset Structure

Book value of inventory RDNT

Data: HB Insights, RDNT SEC Filings

On that front, stocks look fairly priced at ~2.7x book value, although RDNT is also priced at ~6x EV/equity book value. If we were to pay this enterprise value, we would theoretically pay $47 per share, a substantial premium.

It should also be noted that the return on FCF equity for investors is only 3.3% on this valuation, ruling out the duration of equity. At 25x forward FCF estimates of $47 million, that puts RDNT at $21, and at 38x forward P/E, our FY23 EPS estimates put it at $22. Each of these suggests that we could pay a fair and reasonable price for the entry and/or reallocation of RDNT to our equity risk.

Piece 7.

RDNT valuation

Data: HB Insights

In short

We are bullish on RDNT stocks and believe the stock will catch a bid as part of a sector rotation into healthcare going forward. Investors are positioning themselves towards defensive sectors like healthcare and rewarding fundamentals within the space.

RDNT has several interesting features. Imaging is a multivariate service linked to a multitude of medical and paramedical fields. It has countless referral sources and is a necessity for specialized medical treatment in almost all cases. RDNT has additional features, in that, overall, it receives payment before the service is delivered. The shares also seem fair and reasonably priced. We RDNT rate a purchase.