text:
JFK Website (0)
Digital Archives (1)
Person: Rothschild, Robert, 1911-1998
President John F. Kennedy meets with Paul-Henri Spaak, Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs. (L-R) Baron Robert Rothschild, Chief of the Cabinet; Foreign Minister Spaak; President Kennedy; Belgian Ambassador to the United States Louis Scheyven. Oval Office, White House, Washington, D.C.
Search powered by Oracle Endeca ®.
JOHN F. KENNEDY PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND MUSEUMColumbia Point, Boston MA 02125 (617) 514-1600


text: Defense Trade: Contractors Engage in Varied International Alliances (Letter Report, 09/07/2000, GAO/NSIAD-00-213). Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on U.S. and European defense contractors' business alliances, focusing on: (1) the types alliances companies are establishing and their reasons for forming alliances; (2) why companies prefer certain types of alliances over others; and (3) whether U.S. laws, regulations, policies, and practices influence a company's decision to form an alliance of its choice or a type of alliance. GAO noted that: (1) U.S. and European defense companies create teams, joint ventures, and subsidiaries and sometimes merge with or acquire one another in order to compete worldwide for the sale of military weapons systems; (2) two or more companies form a team by negotiating an agreement to work together to pursue a particular government procurement, with one company acting as the primary contractor and others as subcontractors; (3) in contrast, a joint venture is typically a separate legal entity, either a partnership or a corporation, that two or more companies form to pursue a discrete market; (4) a subsidiary is different from both a team and a joint venture because it is wholly owned by one company and is physically located in another country so that it may pursue that country's defense business; (5) defense companies form these alliances and subsidiaries to access and increase their competitiveness in other markets; (6) large U.S. companies prefer to engage in flexible alliances whenever possible; (7) U.S. defense contractors said they prefer teams to other alliances because teaming allows companies to choose new partners in each market in which they wish to compete, increase company capabilities without forming permanent relationships, and access unique technology needed to meet military requirements; (8) however, European governments are not always receptive to teams because they perceive them as alliances led by U.S. companies using U.S. technology that consign European participants to a subsidiary role; (9) U.S. companies see significant disadvantages with joint ventures because the U.S. often abandons multilateral programs before completion and all governments supporting the joint venture make decisions that adversely affect its operational efficiency; (10) large U.S. defense companies do not favor merging with or acquiring major European dense companies; (11) however, European acquisitions of small and medium U.S. defense companies are common because they provide access to the U.S. defense market, which is the world's largest; (12) companies GAO reviewed do not consider the U.S. legal and regulatory environment to be a major impediment to forming an alliance or a principal determinant of the type of alliance chosen; and (13) U.S. companies are concerned with the effect a slow technology transfer process can have on the operation of an alliance and with the effect that a regulation that requires foreign governments to seek U.S. consent before transferring purchased alliance products to third parties may have on future alliance sales. --------------------------- Indexing Terms ----------------------------- REPORTNUM: NSIAD-00-213 TITLE: Defense Trade: Contractors Engage in Varied International Alliances DATE: 09/07/2000 SUBJECT: Defense industry Foreign governments Joint ventures Defense procurement Foreign military sales International trade Technology transfer Foreign corporations International trade regulation Department of Defense contractors IDENTIFIER: NATO ****************************************************************** ** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a ** ** GAO Testimony. ** ** ** ** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although ** ** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but ** ** may not resemble those in the printed version. ** ** ** ** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when ** ** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed ** ** document's contents. ** ** ** ****************************************************************** GAO/NSIAD-00-213 National Security and International Affairs Division B-285807 September 7, 2000 The Honorable James M. Inhofe Chairman The Honorable Charles S. Robb Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support Committee on Armed Services United States Senate Together, the United States and Europe saw defense spending decline over 20 percent after the end of the Cold War. As the Department and Ministries of Defense purchased fewer weapon systems, defense companies on both continents looked increasingly to each other's market for additional sales. To gain political advantage when competing in the other's market, U.S. and European contractors began forming transatlantic business alliances. To better understand these alliances, we surveyed four large U.S. contractors, reviewed four weapon system programs being executed by two of these contractors, and studied three foreign-owned U.S. companies. We used the results of our review to address your questions regarding (1) the types of alliances companies are establishing and their reasons for forming alliances; (2) why companies prefer certain types of alliances over others; and (3) whether U.S. laws, regulations, policies, and practices influence a company's decision to form an alliance or its choice of a type of alliance. U.S. and European defense companies create teams, joint ventures, and subsidiaries and sometimes merge with or acquire one another in order to compete worldwide for the sale of military weapon systems. Generally, two or more companies form a team by negotiating an agreement to work together to pursue a particular government procurement, with one company acting as the primary contractor and others as subcontractors. In contrast, a joint venture is typically a separate legal entity, either a partnership or a corporation, that two or more companies form to pursue a discrete market. A subsidiary is different from both a team and a joint venture because it is wholly owned by one company and is physically located in another country so that it may pursue that country's defense business. Defense companies form these alliances and subsidiaries to access and increase their competitiveness in other markets. Large U.S. companies prefer to engage in flexible alliances whenever possible. U.S. defense contractors said they prefer teams to other alliances because teaming allows companies to choose new partners in each market in which they wish to compete, increase company capabilities without forming permanent relationships, and access unique technology needed to meet military requirements. However, European governments are not always receptive to teams because they perceive them as alliances led by U.S. companies using U.S. technology that consign European participants to a subsidiary role. Companies that want to satisfy European governments' desire for greater industrial participation form joint ventures in which companies share risk, decision-making, work, and, to the extent their governments will allow, technology. However, U.S. companies see significant disadvantages with joint ventures because the U.S. government often abandons multilateral programs before completion and all governments supporting the joint venture make decisions that adversely affect its operational efficiency, such as directing the companies to divide work according to each country's investment rather than according to each company's skills.1 Subsidiaries are not a favored approach because in the fragmented European market a subsidiary in one country has no impact on market access in another country. Neither have large U.S. defense companies favored merging with or acquiring major European defense companies.2 One company said that it has not pursued such combinations because they would be unlikely to reduce operating costs since large non-recurring costs would be incurred in moving sizable manufacturing facilities and there would likely be political opposition to such a move. However, European acquisitions of small and medium U.S. defense companies are common because they provide access to the U.S. defense market, which is the world's largest. As of April 2000, 26 of the largest foreign defense companies own 197 U.S. subsidiaries engaged in the U.S. defense market, according to Department of Defense records.3 Companies we reviewed do not consider the U.S. legal and regulatory environment to be a major impediment to forming an alliance or a principal determinant of the type of alliance chosen. However, U.S. companies are concerned with the effect a slow technology transfer process can have on the operation of an alliance and with the effect that a regulation that requires foreign governments to seek U.S. consent before transferring purchased alliance products to third parties may have on future alliance sales. In written comments on a draft of this report, the Department of Defense agreed with our findings. Between the end of the Cold War and fiscal year 2000, the U.S. government reduced the Department of Defense research and development and procurement annual budgets by about $60 billion. In response to decreased demand in the U.S. defense market, U.S. defense companies consolidated, merged with other companies, and sold off less profitable divisions and business segments unrelated to the company's core competency. For example, today in the United States there are 5 large defense companies that in 1990 were 33 separate businesses. In addition to consolidating, companies are placing greater emphasis on international sales to make up lost revenues. European companies, also faced with their governments' declining defense spending, began forming alliances within Europe, in part, to gain access to other countries' defense markets. As companies merge and establish long-term joint ventures for product development, it becomes increasingly difficult to keep track of the multiplicity of relationships. Figure 1 provides a snapshot of one European company's complex shareholder structure. Company aSEPI is a Spanish state-owned industrial holding company. Source: French Armament Procurement Agency, Ministry of Defense. To access defense markets in Europe, U.S. companies have learned that they have to involve European countries' defense companies in the production of items being sold. This involvement allows European governments to build public support for the purchases. Governments leverage their weapon acquisitions to preserve defense jobs and make their defense companies more competitive in the global market by structuring competitions so that work sharing and technology transfer are competitive discriminators. Initially, European governments required offsets that created or preserved jobs in return for purchasing weapon systems produced outside of their home country.4 An offset could be directly related to the weapon system being purchased,for example, buying parts for the weapon system from companies in the purchasing government's country. But offsets could also be assisting the country's commercial businesses with marketing their products or helping the country develop its infrastructure. Offsets are still common today and, in some cases, have resulted in European companies becoming long-term suppliers to U.S. contractors. European countries spend far less than the United States on research and development. For example, in 1997, the United States spent $32.2 billion on defense research and development compared with the combined spending of France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom of $7.1 billion. Therefore, larger European countries have come to want more from U.S.-European business alliances than workshare. They also want technology that will make their defense companies more competitive in the global marketplace. Technology transfer is widely used to fulfill offset obligations and may be a key factor in a country's acquisition decisions. It provides European governments with a technology infusion that enables their companies to produce more advanced weapon systems for the export market, which is responsible for a significant portion of some countries' defense industry sales. Many governments on both continents are increasingly showing support for transatlantic alliances. On February 5, 2000, the U.S. Department of Defense and the United Kingdom Ministry of Defense signed a Declaration of Principles in support of defense industry integration, and the Department of Defense is in discussion with other European countries on this subject. Because the United States expects to fight jointly with its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies in future conflicts, it wants to ensure that each country's military forces bring compatible equipment to the battle. The Department of Defense believes that the best way to ensure that U.S. and allied equipment can work together is to have U.S. and European defense companies jointly develop weapon systems. If U.S. and European governments also jointly fund development programs, each country's weapon system costs should also decline because each would be responsible for only a portion of total development costs. In addition, Department officials believe that close ties between U.S. and European defense companies ensure companies access to each other's defense market. Defense companies must consider various statutes, regulations, and other legal requirements when considering transatlantic alliances. Among other things, these laws, regulations, and other legal requirements are meant to ensure fair competition, establish a preference for or require use of a domestic source, regulate imports and exports, and protect national security. Table 1 lists important U.S. statutes, regulations, and other legal requirements and briefly explains the purpose of each. Laws and implementing documents Primary purpose These laws: Require parties to large mergers to report their plans to the Federal Antitrust Laws Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice; Clayton Act Prohibit acquisitions that Hart-Scott-Rodino Act substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly; and Sherman Act Prohibit acquisitions, mergers, and joint ventures that cause unreasonable restraints of trade or monopolize a market. Domestic Source Laws Buy American Act These acts either establish a preference or a requirement for Berry Amendment acquiring domestic articles, supplies, and materials for public use. Other statutory restrictions These acts and regulations control the import and export of military goods and services and goods that may have both commercial and defense uses. The Arms Export Control Act establishes U.S. policy that allows international programs and projects for cooperative exchange of data, research, development, production, procurement, and logistics support to achieve specific national defense requirements and objectives of mutual concern. The act also established the need for export regulations that reduce the international trade in Import/Export Laws and Regulations weapons and lessen the danger of regional conflicts. Arms Export Control Act The International Traffic in Arms International Traffic in Arms Regulations define the type of defense Regulations articles and services that require the Department of State's approval for Export Administration Act export, the entities that may request such approval, the general policies Export Administration Regulations and procedures related to exports, and the criminal penalties for failing to comply with the regulation. The Export Administration Act implements the U.S. government's export control licensing and enforcement system for goods that may be used for both commercial and defense purposes. Although the Export Administration Act expired in 1994, the export control process under that act continues under the authority of an executive order. The Export Administration Regulations implement the Export Administration Act. Together the Executive Order and Amendment establish the interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States and give the President the power to act upon the Committee's recommendations. The Committee is responsible for reviewing the voluntary notices of foreign companies that intend to merge with, acquire, or take over U.S. companies and submitting to the President any recommendations that a foreign company suspend or abandon its purchase of a U.S. firm. The President is empowered to act upon Committee recommendations and may also order the divestiture of a foreign company's ownership in a U.S. company. National Security Legal The Manual prescribes requirements, Restrictions on Acquisitions and restrictions, and other safeguards Mergers necessary to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classified information Executive Order 11858 released by U.S. government Executive Branch departments and agencies to Exon-Florio Amendment their contractors. It provides that before a foreign-owned company may National Industrial Security access classified information, Program Operating Manual measures must be taken as necessary to remove the possibility of unauthorized access or adverse effect on classified contract performance by a foreign owner. The level of access granted without restrictions depends on the type of mitigation employed to offset foreign ownership, control, or influence. Foreign-owned U.S. firms operating under a trust or proxy agreement do not have any access limitations, while firms operating under a special security agreement can access information above the secret level only if the government contracting activity prior to the award of a classified contract determines that it is in the national interest to allow the firm access to such information. Source: GAO analysis of U.S. statutes, regulations, and other legal requirements affecting transatlantic alliances. Our survey and case studies show that defense companies are engaging in various types of alliances to gain transatlantic market access and become more globally competitive. Six of the seven companies in our study are part of project-based teams, joint ventures, subsidiaries, or mergers and acquisitions, while a representative of the seventh said that the company recently signed an agreement with a European company that provides for teaming when opportunities arise. Large U.S. contractors said that when they compete for business in foreign markets, they form the type alliance that is most likely to result in market access and yield the greatest return on their investment. Officials from European-owned U.S. companies told us that European companies purchase U.S. defense companies to acquire new product lines, capabilities, and advanced technology that enhance access to the U.S. defense market. Table 2 displays the number of teams, joint ventures, and subsidiaries in which the three large U.S. contractors included in our review that established alliances and subsidiaries are engaged. Teams Joint ventures Subsidiaries Number of reviewed companies engaged in this type alliance 3 3 2 Aggregate number of alliances formed by these companies 115a 26 3b aThis number is an estimate rather than a precise count because one contractor said that his company does not maintain a centralized database that includes all teams of which the company is a part. bIncorporated marketing offices are not included as subsidiaries. Source: GAO analysis of contractor data. Large U.S. contractors said that they prefer to engage in alliances that give them maximum flexibility. However, the companies said that to access certain markets or compete for certain procurements they must sometimes engage in less flexible linkages. Teaming offers more flexibility than other types of alliances. Because teaming agreements are negotiated, they may contain any provisions to which the parties can agree. Prime contractors said they often try to limit the life of the team to an individual procurement because if a contractor wants to sell its product in more than one market, it gains an acquisition advantage by choosing different subcontractors in each of the markets. Teaming is also a way of temporarily adding capabilities that make a company more competitive. One large U.S. contractor said that teaming with a European company with product expertise different from its own allows it to compete for sales in parts of the U.S. market in which it is not a leader without making an investment to acquire that capability. Another said that governments sometimes require capabilities in their weapon systems that only one company can deliver. For example, the U.S. Army requires that the computer system being developed for a reconnaissance vehicle that it and the United Kingdom are jointly funding be able to communicate with computer systems of command vehicles. Only one company possesses this technology; as a result, the joint venture initiated a nonexclusive teaming arrangement with the company.5 However, according to the Department of Defense, teaming arrangements are not always acceptable to European governments and companies. At a time when European governments are insisting on performing a larger portion of a program's work and sharing more U.S. technology, a Department official said European governments and their contractors are less receptive to alliances in which U.S. companies lead programs, thereby retaining most U.S. technology, and relegate European participants to subcontractor status. U.S. and European companies may form joint ventures when their governments are jointly procuring a weapon system and want their countries' contractors to work together as partners to develop and/or produce the system. U.S. companies also engage in transatlantic joint ventures to gain an advantage when competing for European acquisitions. Joint ventures are advantageous because governments see them as a way that companies can work together as equals, sharing jobs and technology. However, contractors said government actions sometimes make joint ventures less attractive alliances. Unlike a team, a joint venture typically does not place one company in a leadership position. Instead, the companies share risks and assets in joint pursuit of a discrete market, often a specific weapon system program. We studied two joint ventures that companies formed because their governments wanted one to cooperatively develop and produce an air and missile defense system and another to develop a reconnaissance vehicle. U.S. and European governments are jointly funding both systems. In these joint ventures, the participants share decision-making, program risks, technology (to the extent allowed by individual governments), and program work. Representatives of one U.S. company that is located in the United Kingdom said that United Kingdom joint ventures are likely to be more common in the future because the government is moving toward having one contractor support a system from cradle to grave. The representatives said that this concept requires a contractor to make a large, long-term capital investment in facilities, equipment, and personnel, and companies will likely want to form joint ventures to share these risks. Contractors said joint ventures are not the most advantageous transatlantic linkage because the U.S. government often abandons programs that the ventures support before completion and U.S. and European governments often decide which companies should form a joint venture, as well as requiring that their companies' work share equal their country's program investment. Of the two programs in our study executed by joint ventures, the Department of Defense has decided not to provide future funding for one and did not plan long-term funding for the second until the program had been in place for 3 years. Joint venture contractors also told us that companies work together best if they are allowed to decide who will compose an alliance because they look for partners that complement their capabilities. Companies also want to decide what percentage of work each participant will perform so that work may be allocated efficiently. One contractor representative said that, when a joint venture must ensure that each country receives work share equal to its investment, work cannot always be assigned to the company best able to perform the tasks. Of the four large U.S. defense companies in our sample, two have subsidiaries in Europe. We reviewed one subsidiary established in the United Kingdom by each company. Representatives of these subsidiaries said that because of their permanent presence and the number of local citizens they employ, they are better able to compete with the United Kingdom's large contractors. However, being located in the United Kingdom does not guarantee that a subsidiary will be treated more favorably in all respects than other foreign sellers. In addition, contractors said that because the European defense market is fragmented, establishing subsidiaries is not always an efficient use of capital. In some regards, subsidiaries are treated no differently than other foreign companies. For example, the United Kingdom treats foreign-owned subsidiaries as it does all other foreign sellers in regard to offsets. The United Kingdom's policy is that any company selling defense goods to the United Kingdom must provide an offset if the goods being sold include components valued at more than about $15 million that are not produced in the United Kingdom. Therefore, if a subsidiary does not plan local production of a substantial portion of a weapon system that the United Kingdom is purchasing, it must subcontract work to United Kingdom defense companies, transfer technology, or perform some other defense activity that benefits the government. Contractors said that it is sometimes difficult to make a good business case for establishing a subsidiary. Because Europe is made up of many different countries, each with its own defense budget and acquisition process, a subsidiary in one country does not ensure access to the defense markets of other countries. The contractors told us that if a country's defense budget is small and potential profits from likely sales are limited, or if product pricing is dependent upon large infrastructures, as in the aircraft industry, a subsidiary is likely not feasible. A complete picture of the status of U.S. and European mergers and acquisitions cannot be drawn because little data is available on the number of European defense companies that U.S. companies have acquired as subsidiaries.6 But available data shows that no large U.S. and European defense contractors have merged or acquired one another7 and foreign acquisitions of smaller U.S. contractors are common. Large U.S. companies in our sample cited several obstacles to mergers and acquisitions among large U.S. and European defense contractors. One contractor said that despite over-capacity on both sides of the Atlantic consolidation of manufacturing operations does not appear practical because of the large nonrecurring cost of moving work and the political opposition such a move would create. This contractor also said that the complex interlocking ownership structure of European companies makes it difficult for a U.S. company to reduce costs through consolidation because the European companies have negotiated and contracted work share and established long-term supplier relationships for most products. Other contractors pointed out that U.S. antitrust laws would likely prevent consolidations of large U.S. and European contractors because the size of consolidated companies would give them a competitive advantage. Finally, a representative of one contractor said that his company is not financially able to acquire European companies and is not interested in being acquired. Records maintained by the Office of the Secretary of Defense show that, as of April 2000, 26 of the largest foreign defense companies own 197 U.S. subsidiaries engaged in the U.S. defense market. Purchasing U.S. companies is advantageous because it increases the European owners' access to the largest defense market in the world by providing them with new and profitable product lines and increased capability. Access to U.S. funded technology and acquisition programs are also powerful incentives driving this trend of foreign acquisitions. But purchases can be expensive and, in some cases, market access is limited. Our case studies show that European companies often enter or expand sales in the U.S. market by acquiring a U.S. defense company. A foreign company principally involved in food processing and real estate investments acquired a U.S. company that is a diversified manufacturer of commercial and defense products and a leader in certain niche markets. The acquisition provided the European buyer with an entirely new endeavor and new market. In another case study, a foreign company acquired a U.S. electronics company that complemented its systems integration capabilities, expanded its market, and provided more of a presence in the United States. The acquirer expects that the synergies between the companies will allow it to obtain a leadership position in the aerospace and defense industry. Our study also shows that a European company may access U.S. technology and eliminate competitors in the global market through the acquisition of U.S. companies. For example, through one case study we found a European company that acquired two U.S. companies manufacturing a product that is critical to U.S. national security, closed their operations, and moved specialized hardware and software to the European company's facilities. According to Department officials, these actions allowed the European company to narrow the U.S. technological lead in this product, which reduced its competition in the world market. Industry experts also said the foreign company obtained unique technology from one of the acquired companies that enabled it to win a recent U.S. military contract over its remaining U.S. competitor. In addition, the foreign company later acquired another U.S. company manufacturing a similar product and moved that company's operation to Europe.8 These actions, according to Department officials, allowed the European company to narrow the technological lead that the United States held in this product. Even though foreign acquisitions of smaller U.S. companies are common, our sample shows that such consolidations can be expensive because foreign companies pay large sums of money to acquire U.S. companies and incur additional legal fees to transfer company ownership and comply with U.S. laws. Table 3 shows the approximate cost in then-year dollars of the foreign acquisitions of U.S. companies in our review. Dollars in millions Acquisitiona Purchase cost Legal feesb #1 $5 $0.085c #2 704 3.000 #3 1,100 2.000 #4 10,000 d aOne company that we selected as a case study was acquired by a foreign company that was in turn acquired by another foreign company. Therefore, we reviewed two acquisitions for one of the case studies. bLegal fees include fees for filing with the antitrust review authorities and with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, if applicable. cThis acquisition did not undergo an antitrust review or a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. dAccording to a company executive, the company's records do not separate legal fees from other transfer costs. Total transfer costs were approximately $158 million and included legal fees, investment banker fees, consultant fees, and other costs. Source: GAO analysis of contractor data. Although purchasing a U.S. defense company enhances market access, it does not ensure full access to the U.S. defense market. Department of Defense policy does not allow foreign-owned U.S. defense companies to execute contracts that require access to information above the secret level unless the government contracting authority determines that the release of such information advances U.S. national security interests and the owners of the information approve its release. This policy prevented a United Kingdom-owned U.S. company in our sample from bidding on Navy and Air Force contracts worth in excess of $123 million. U.S. companies in our sample said U.S. laws and regulations are neither the principal determinant of whether they form an alliance nor the reason one type of alliance is chosen over another. Rather, the companies regard the legal and regulatory environment that the United States has designed to protect national security and foreign policy interests as a cost of doing business. However, companies said these laws, regulations, and policies may increase the complexity of establishing an alliance, increase start-up and operational costs, impact an alliance's ability to operate efficiently, and prevent the synergy expected from a business consolidation. To meet the requirements of antitrust laws and to prevent future reviews or a directed divestiture for national security reasons, many alliances provide antitrust agencies and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States with substantial amounts of information regarding their intended alliances. Foreign-owned U.S. defense companies in our sample said gathering this information requires a significant amount of time and increases start-up costs. However, according to a Department of Justice official, antitrust laws have not stopped any foreign and U.S. companies from forming alliances and records show that the President at the recommendation of the Committee has only prohibited one foreign company from purchasing a U.S. defense company.9 Because companies combine all legal fees in their financial records, only one company in our study was able to approximate the cost of filing these antitrust and national security documents. It estimated that it expended about $400,000 to prepare information for the consideration of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States and about $100,000 to prepare information for antitrust agencies. Neither the antitrust agencies nor the Committee required the company to provide additional information that would have increased costs. Foreign-owned U.S. companies also said that preventing foreign owners from using their ownership to obtain unauthorized access to export- controlled and classified technology, as required by the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual, is a continuing expense. Companies reported that costs for security personnel, record keeping, Board of Directors fees and meeting expenses, and legal fees necessary to protect U.S. technology from disclosure range from about $31,000 to $295,000 per year.10 Sales Most alliances in our sample view technology transfer laws, regulations, and policy as exacting a higher cost than other elements of the legal and regulatory environment on an alliance's operation. Joint ventures, subsidiaries, and teams, which execute programs that depend upon sharing U.S. technology, expressed concern with the time that it takes the U.S. government to approve the export of technical data to foreign companies that participate directly or indirectly in the alliance. Subsidiaries also expressed concern with the effect retransfer restrictions could have on future sales in the market they were established to access. Before a U.S. company participating in an alliance can share with the alliance's foreign participants many technologies owned by the U.S. government or the company, it must, according to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, obtain approval of a technical assistance agreement from the State Department. The agreement identifies the U.S. technology that the U.S. government is willing to allow the parties to the agreement to share. Because many programs being executed by transatlantic alliances are leveraging U.S. technology, work is slowed or cannot begin until the State Department approves the agreement. Table 4 displays data provided by contractors on the length of time that the State Department required before approving technical assistance agreements for programs included in our sample. Average approval time for Average approval time required to basic agreement change a basic agreementa Program 1 107 70 Program 2 95 Not reported Program 3 74 58 Note: Only three of the programs that we reviewed required technical assistance agreements. The fourth program required a manufacturing license that the State Department approved in 95 days. aChanges may include adding or deleting parties with whom data may be exchanged or changing the scope of the data that may be shared. Source: GAO analysis of contractor data. The time the United States requires to export technology is even greater if an alliance needs access to government-owned rather than company-owned technology. Department of Defense Directive 5230.11, which implements U.S. policy for the disclosure of classified military information to foreign governments and international organizations, and Directive 2040.2, which regulates the international transfer of technology, goods, services, and munitions, require the Department of Defense to review government-owned classified and export-controlled unclassified information and approve its release to foreign parties.11 A joint venture in our sample reported that during the 27 months after the State Department approved its request for a technical assistance agreement, the Department of Defense required an average of 131 days per document to make a disclosure decision.12 Department of Defense foreign disclosure officials said the decision process was lengthy because (1) the joint venture requested a large number of documents, many of which were sensitive; (2) the joint venture failed to provide all required information when requesting data; (3) reviews of requested information by its owners were sometimes lengthy; and (4) the Department did not provide officials with a Technology Assessment/Control Plan13 that it requires be used as the basis for foreign disclosure decisions. Subsidiaries also expressed concern that retransfer restrictions that the U.S. government places on weapon systems sold to foreign governments may reduce the subsidiary's ability to compete for future business in the European market. The U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations require recipients receiving U.S. exports of all defense articles and services to obtain the written approval of the U.S. Department of State before transferring those articles and services to third parties. Representatives of subsidiaries said that this regulation sometimes prevents them from successfully competing with European firms. For example, one large U.S. company with a subsidiary in the United Kingdom that competed to develop and produce an air-to-air missile for the United Kingdom believed that it could not be competitive with European companies unless it received relief from this regulation. Because the United Kingdom plans to sell the selected missile as the munition on an aircraft that it is manufacturing and will export to other countries, a retransfer restriction would require the United Kingdom to seek U.S. permission each time it wants to sell the aircraft. In cases such as this, the Department of Defense sometimes agrees in writing to allow the resale of the item in question, in this case the missile, to a select group of countries. However, because exports are under the control of the State Department, the Department of Defense can only provide firm assurance that it will not oppose disclosure of the incorporated technology to the named countries, not that the State Department will agree to allow the missile to be resold to the countries. Companies in our sample said technology policy has the potential to prevent or diminish the synergy that alliances expect from business combinations. A foreign-owned company in our sample and its parent that produce similar military items want to share their knowledge and expertise. However, because it is Department of Defense policy to prevent foreign owners from using their ownership to obtain unauthorized access to export-controlled and classified technology, the two companies find it difficult to learn from one another and often find themselves in competition. Similarly, representatives of a joint venture that is leveraging U.S. government-owned technology said that some of the technology the United States released to the joint venture is restricted to U.S. access only. The representatives said that because this restriction prevents the free flow of information it undermines the functioning of the joint venture's U.S.-European contract teams. However, another company in our sample realizes synergy without sharing export-controlled or classified data. A representative of a United Kingdom company said that its purchase of a U.S. company will boost operating performance and competitiveness through the synergies and opportunities available to the combined companies. The combination builds on the U.S. company's cost management and financial control skills and the United Kingdom company's large-scale project management and systems integration skills. The U.S. and European defense companies that we reviewed are trying to maintain flexibility so as to increase their sales in a market that has seen little to no growth globally. Their goal is to seek alliances that best increase their ability to sell products to other governments. In this dynamic environment, the U.S. companies have preferred alliances, such as teams, that they can easily abandon should the alliance be unsuccessful in competing for new business or should an alliance with other companies offer greater potential for increased sales and revenues. Foreign companies included in our review, seeking to increase their share of the largest defense market in the world--the U.S. market--have been willing to establish a more permanent presence. As these U.S. and European companies focus on quickly gaining market share, they are more willing to test different types of alliances. While the companies we reviewed do not consider the U.S. legal and regulatory environment to be the driver in their choice of an alliance, they do find that some laws and regulations, particularly those related to technology transfer, affect an alliance's operation. However, in this rapidly changing environment, it is difficult to determine the full effect U.S laws, regulations, policies, and practices may have on future linkages. The Department of Defense agreed with a draft of this report and provided technical comments. The Department's written comments are reprinted in appendix I. The Department's technical comments have been incorporated as appropriate. We examined the integration of the U.S. and European defense industries by surveying four large U.S. defense contractors, examining four programs two of these companies are executing, and studying three foreign-owned U.S. companies. We cannot statistically state that the conditions we found in our review apply to all U.S. and European industry alliances. However, our aim was not to project our findings to the universe of transatlantic alliances, but to illuminate trends in today's changing business environment. To further ensure that these trends are representative, we discussed them with Department of Defense officials tracking transatlantic linkages and an industry expert familiar with today's business landscape. We judgmentally selected contractors that are included among the largest diversified U.S. defense companies and programs that are executed by various types of transatlantic alliances, including joint ventures, teams, and subsidiaries. The three foreign-owned U.S. companies were judgmentally selected to include different technologies and various European countries. We did not audit financial or licensing data provided by companies or programs and cannot attest to its accuracy. To determine the types of alliances formed between U.S. and European defense companies, the impetus for forming these alliances, companies' reasons for choosing certain types of alliances over others, and the influence that the U.S. legal and regulatory environment has on decisions to form alliances, we analyzed survey responses and information collected from defense companies included in our review. We also analyzed U.S. laws, regulations, and policies to determine how they might affect transatlantic linkages and compared our results to the companies' responses and documentation. To accomplish our analysis, we held discussions with and collected information from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, Washington, D.C.; Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Washington, D.C.; Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence, Washington, D.C.; Defense Security Service, Alexandria, Virginia; Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Arlington, Virginia; Defense Intelligence Agency, Washington, D.C.; National Ground Intelligence Center, Charlottesville, Virginia; Army Counterintelligence Center, Fort Meade, Maryland; Department of Defense General Counsel, Washington, D.C.; U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; Defence Export Services Organisation, Ministry of Defence, London, England; and the U.S. Embassy, London, England. We also collected documents from and held discussions with U.S.- and European-owned U.S. defense companies included in our review. We conducted our work from October 1999 through June 2000 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. We are sending copies of this report to other interested congressional committees; the Honorable William Cohen, Secretary of Defense; the Honorable Louis Caldera, Secretary of the Army; the Honorable Richard Danzig, Secretary of the Navy; and the Honorable F. Whitten Peters, Secretary of the Air Force. We will make copies available to others upon request. Please contact me at (202) 512-4841 if you or your staff have any questions concerning this report. Major contributors to this report are Barbara Haynes and Erin Baker. Katherine V. Schinasi Associate Director Defense Acquisitions Issues Comments From the Department of Defense (707453) (707453) 1. Governments take these actions when the joint venture is formed to execute a government-to-government cooperative program. 2. Little data is available on the number of European companies that U.S. companies have merged with or acquired. 3. According to an official in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the office estimated the largest foreign defense companies based on each company's reported sales dollars. 4. Offsets are commercial or industrial benefits that a company offers a foreign government as an inducement or condition for the purchase of military goods or services. See Defense Trade: European Initiatives to Integrate the Defense Market (GAO/NSIAD-98-6 , Oct. 29, 1997). 5. Teaming agreements may be exclusive or nonexclusive. An exclusive agreement precludes the teaming partners from joining with other contractors to pursue the same procurement. 6. A Department of Defense representative said the Department could use its contract database to develop a partial list of U.S. subsidiaries in Europe. However, the list would be limited to subsidiaries to whom the Department awarded contracts with a value of $25,000 or more over the last 5 years. 7. Although no mergers or acquisitions have occurred between large U.S. and European defense companies, at least one large U.S. company is considering selling one of its divisions to a European buyer. 8. The European company acquired this U.S. company after the Congress enacted the Exon-Florio Amendment to the Defense Production Act in 1988. The European buyer voluntarily notified the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States of its intended acquisition of the U.S. company and stated in the notification that the business might be moved to Europe. The Committee did not recommend to the President that this acquisition be suspended. 9. A number of potential mergers or acquisitions have been withdrawn or restructured during the course of a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. In addition, in one case a foreign company agreed to voluntarily divest a U.S. company already acquired. 10. All companies executing classified contracts incur continuing expenses for security personnel. However, foreign-owned U.S. companies may incur additional expenses because the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual requires each company to establish a permanent committee of its Board of Directors, known as the Government Security Committee, to ensure that the company maintains policies and procedures to safeguard export controlled and classified information with which it is entrusted. The Manual further requires the appointment of a Technology Control Officer and the development and approval of a Technology Control Plan. 11. The National Security Decision Memorandum formulates U.S. national policy governing decisions on the disclosure of classified military information to foreign governments and international organizations. The Memorandum is implemented by National Disclosure Policy-1, an interagency document, that is implemented within the Department of Defense by Directive 5230.11. However, the National Disclosure Policy does not regulate the disclosure of six classes of information. Other national disclosure policies determine the release of national intelligence data, counterintelligence operational information, communications security information, nuclear information, sensitive compartmented information, and strategic planning and guidance. Other national committees or U.S. government officials make disclosure decisions on these classes of information. 12. The average release time does not include consideration of documents for which decisions were pending or documents whose release the Department denied. 13. A Technology Assessment/Control Plan itemizes all sensitive U.S. classified and unclassified articles, commodities, or technical data that may be transferred under a proposed international agreement, assesses the risk to U.S. national security of such transfers, and identifies the foreign technologies that the United States is likely to acquire as a result of a proposed agreement. *** End of document. ***

subset: commoncrawl


text:
SMU students will call a box home — if only briefly
To raise awareness about homelessness and raise money for Vogel Alcove, students at Southern Methodist University will take part Wednesday in an event called "Sleep in a Box."
The students will divide into teams, decorate large boxes, then "sleep" in them.
(Since the event starts with registration at 6 p.m. and ends at 8:15 p.m. with the awarding of prizes for the best decorating and fundraising efforts, it's doubtful that a whole lot of sleeping in boxes will actually take place — but it's the thought that counts.)
"Sleep in a Box" is organized by Mustang Heroes, a student service organization at SMU.
From the tally on this website, it looks like students have already raised more than $1,500 in entry fees and donations for Vogel Alcove, Dallas' only early-childhood care and education center primarily focused on helping homeless children.
PHOTO: If a box is a home, is this a condo development? (BRUCE TOMASO/Staff)


text:
Compared to other forms of social media, podcasting has been around for quite a long time. This posting will be the first in a two part mini-series that will give an overview of podcasting, and how you can use it to develop your online business community. Podcasting first became popular in the mid-2000's, with the introduction of Apple's iPod, and other personal audio listening devices. The name combines both the "pod" from iPOD and "cast" from broadcast. However, it is not only consumed via iPOD's, and it is in no way a broadcast in the traditional sense of the word. Instead, podcasting combines the use of MP3 audio files, with the syndication and distribution capabilities of RSS feeds. This combination of technologies allows podcasters to create audio files that are automatically pushed to subscribers. Listeners subscribe to your feed by clicking on the RSS icon, which pulls up a feedpage where you can subscribe. They are downloaded either manually, or by using special "podcatcher" software, such as iTunes, Zune or even a generic RSS reader. When you sync your audio device with that software, it will automatically transfer the files to your device to listen to (depending on your settings of course).
Podcasting is a great way to connect with your target market in a familiar delivery medium, due to its similarity to radio talk shows. However, podcasts are "on demand" and can be consumed on their schedule using any device that plays an MP3, including iPOD's, Zunes, Tablets, and PC's. It can also be a powerful marketing tool if executed on a consistent basis, especially if your podcast provides valuable information to listeners. Publishing a podcast on a periodic basis will allow you to create a connection with potential customers, and they will feel they are getting to know you and your philosophy on business and industry. Building this trust with your target market is crucial for building your online community! People will be more likely to want to work with you, or recommend you to others, if you sound like you know what you are talking about. So how do you get started podcasting to grow your online community?
As with any marketing endeavor, it is important for you to plan out your podcasting efforts to ensure you make a positive impact with your customers. Your first step should be to connect your podcasting strategy, with your overall digital marketing strategy. This will allow you to determine what you want to communicate and who you want to communicate with. Do you want to share your expertise, discuss industry news, or have interviews with knowledgeable people on topics related to your business?
Once you determine your target audience and theme, you will want to consider what format you will use for your podcast. Some podcasts are short, with online the principle person speaking about topics of interest to their target market. Other formats may include interviews with industry leaders, tutorials, advice or even an online talk show format. By determining the format of your podcast, you will also be able to determine how long you want to have each episode be, as well as how often you will publish. Some of my favorite podcasts are short, 15 minute monologues with only one person speaking about a focused topic, while others I listen to are more like radio talk shows, where there are 1 or 2 hosts, who interview people for 30 to 45 minutes.
Obviously, it may be easier to publish a 5-10 minute monologue, as opposed to an interview based podcast, so you must keep this in mind when developing your plan. Of course, if you are producing an hour long interview show every week, this will be more difficult to complete than a shorter one on a daily basis. Before you decide, you may want to listen to other podcasts, and see how they approach their content and format. To get an idea of what other podcasters are doing, you can check out Blogtalkradio, which is a Podcast and social networking site that offers the ability to broadcast your own online radio show. Other similar podcast sites you can check out to see what others are doing includes PodBean.com, PodOmatic, and Libsyn.com.
After you have made some initial decisions on target audience, content, style and format, you should start considering the types of equipment you will need to start your new podcasting initiative. Often, you can obtain the software for little money, if not for free. This includes audio capturing software (which you most likely have on your computer), and some form of recording device, such as a microphone. If you have an iPhone or Android based phone, there are applications you can download to capture audio, and send to your PC for editing. Finally, if you are doing a long distance interview, you may want to use a tool like Skype to record your conversation, so you can both communicate and record digitally at the same time. The main point is to ensure that you can create files that are easily transferred to your computer to edit, if not already recorded to your hard drive. Once you get your audio files onto your computer, you can use a program like Audacity, which is a free and open source software program for editing audio on both MAC and Windows/PC based computers. There are many tutorials on how to use Audacity, so I suggest you check those out as well.
Of course if you want to take your podcasting to a higher level, you will need to obtain some higher end equipment and podcasting gear. A great option for the beginner podcaster is the Behringer PodcasStudio USB, which is a low cost "out of the box" solution, that comes with podcasting software, mics and a mixer, along with guides and tutorials. Another similar product is the Technical Pro PM-22 Podcast System (Silver), which also comes with software and hardware components. For information on this, you should check out the Podcast Answer Man website. For more information on podcast tools, you can check out the Podcasting Toolbox from Mashable, which has a list of 70+ tools for podcasting. You can see a more in-depth video on Podcasting on Common Craft, a website that has many great video tutorials. You may also want to read Podcasting for Dummies, Podcasting Bible , or Podcast Solutions: The Complete Guide to Audio and Video Podcasting for step-by-step guides on creating your podcast. Or you can contact Aday Interactive for assistance on developing your podcasting strategy.
In the next posting we will talk about publishing your podcast on iTunes and Zune Marketplace, and how you can promote it via your blog, Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and LinkedIn!


text:
Matera Wall Sconce
The Matera Wall Sconce adds a bright pop of color to your wall in a brilliant modern and sophisticated way. This unique wall sconce is inspired by paintings from the abstract expressionist movement. Its graphic look offers a hint of expressionist style, while remaining truly original.
- Modern Wall Sconce
- Satin Nickel Finish
- Amber Glass Shade
- Number of Bulbs: 1 (Not Included)
- Socket Type: CA (Candelabra Base)
- Max Bulb Wattage: 60 W
- Estimated Bulb Life: 1500 Hours
- Lumen Rating: 672
- Input Voltage: 120
- Color Temperature: 2700 K
- UL Listed (Dry Locations)
- Standard Dimmer
Overall: 7"w x 7"h
- (1) Matera Wall Sconce
Small Parcel (FedEx / UPS)
- Minimal Assembly Required; Instructions & Hardware Included
One Year Manufacturer's Warranty Against Defects
1-877-224-6663 or 973-276-0444
Copyright 2003-2015 by Evofurniture, LLC. All rights reserved.


text:
Equalling the record held by former Brazil striker Ronaldo with his 71st minute strike, Klose has quietly put his name into the history books with a remarkable lack of drama.
Famous for performing mid-air somersaults to celebrate scoring important goals earlier in his career, he changed to mostly raising a clenched fist and giving a quick smile before putting his serious game face back on and getting back to work.
But on Saturday the somersault was back after he scored the equaliser from close range with his first touch less than two minutes after coming off the bench in a 2-2 draw in Group G.
"I don't know how long its been since I did a somersault. but at least it worked out," he said after the match.
"You come in and want to turn the game around. Twenty (World Cup) matches and 15 goals isn't bad at all."
His goal against Ghana also moved Klose one ahead in the World Cup scoring list of compatriot Gerd Mueller, who led West Germany to the 1974 World Cup title.
Klose had shared second place with Mueller since scoring twice in a 4-0 quarter-final win over Argentina on July 3, 2010.
The best German striker of his generation, Klose is also his country's all-time leading scorer with 70 goals in 133 games.
The soft-spoken Klose is the antithesis of flamboyant and in many ways the epitome of Germany's star-less World Cup teams.
"There's no shame in falling down - the only shame is not getting back up on your feet again," Klose said in his profile on the German FA's website (www.dfb.de).
Tall and strong in the air, Klose is known for his superb timing and leaping ability. He has been consistently lethal in front of goal in the last three World Cups helped by the fact that Germany reached the final and semi-finals twice.
In 2002 Klose scored five headed goals as underdogs Germany made it to the final, where they lost 2-0 to Brazil with Ronaldo scoring twice to register eight for the tournament.
Four years later with Germany as hosts, Klose won the Golden Boot when he scored another five goals in leading Germany to the semi-finals. In 2010 he scored four more in South Africa.
Klose has also been the beneficiary of outstanding crops of attacking midfielders who have set up many of his 70 goals for Germany. He has seen off challenges from a number of younger strikers eager to replace him, including Mario Gomez.
In fact, Klose is the only specialised striker in Germany coach Joachim Loew's squad in Brazil after Gomez was dropped.
Klose moved with his Polish family to Germany in 1986 at the age of eight when he spoke only a few words of German.
He broke into the Bundesliga with Kaiserslautern in 1999 and five years later moved to Werder Bremen before joining Bayern Munich in 2007. He was transferred to Lazio three years ago.
Klose headed the winner on his Germany debut to earn a 2-1 victory over Albania in 2001 to avoid an embarrassing draw.
Alongside his record-breaking goal tally, Klose will long be remembered for his sportsmanship with his acts of fair play making headline news in Germany.
He told a referee in Italy in 2012 to disallow a goal he had just scored because he used his hand. Seven years earlier, playing for Werder Bremen, he declined to accept a penalty kick because he did not think he had been fouled.
The top 10
T1. Miroslav Klose (Germany) 15 goals, 20 matches, 3 tournaments
At the ripe old age of 36, the Germany legend got goal number 15 to move clear of his childhood idol Mueller and still has the rest of the tournament to score number 16. The Lazio striker has said he will retire from the international scene after this summer in Brazil and what a way that would be to go out.
T1. Ronaldo (Brazil) 15 goals, 19 matches, 4 tournaments
When he rounded goalkeeper Richard Kingson and slotted home after just five minutes of Brazil's last-16 tie against Ghana on June 27 2006, Ronaldo Luis Nazário de Lima, the 'original Ronaldo', became the highest scorer in World Cup history. It was his 15th goal on football's biggest stage and was a fitting reward for a player who possessed strength, power, pace and technique in abundance. Even more remarkable is that 11 of those 15 goals came after two career-threatening knee injuries led one doctor to write his career off.
3. Gerd Mueller (West Germany) 14 goals, 13 matches, 2 tournaments
The record Ronaldo surpassed on that night in Dortmund had previously belonged to Gerd Mueller, another of the game's greats. And while Ronaldo took four editions of the World Cup to reach his mark, 'Der Bomber' set the bar at 14 after just two. Incredibly, the Germany striker bagged 10 in 1970, during what is widely regarded as one of the best World Cups ever seen. And four years later he added a further four, his last one, in the final against Holland, proving the most memorable - not only did it take him past Just Fontaine's record of 13, but it won the World Cup for Germany too. It also proved to be his last goal for his country, as he brought the curtain down on his international career after the game.
4. Just Fontaine (France) 13 goals, 6 matches, 1 tournament
The legendary French centre-forward may have shone for just one summer, but what a crazy, goal-laden summer it was. The tournament in Sweden was positively dripping with Fontaine goals in 1958 - four against West Germany, a hat-trick against Paraguay, a pair of braces against Yugoslavia and Northern Ireland, and strikes against Scotland and Brazil - and he remains to this day the player who has scored the most in a single edition of a World Cup. That record, in these days of cannier defences, is showing no signs of being beaten any time soon.
5. Pele (Brazil) 12 goals, 14 matches, 4 tournaments
At the tender age of 17, Edson Arantes do Nascimento, usually shortened to Pele, already had six goals and a World Cup title to his name. What came next was hardly prolific, but nevertheless helped cement his reputation as one of, if not the, greatest player of all time. He managed to add just two more goals over the next two editions before the touch paper was eventually lit once more in 1970 as his four goals helped him and Brazil to a third World Cup success in Mexico.
6. Sandor Kocsis (Hungary) 11 goals, 5 matches, 1 tournament
It's difficult to imagine a more emphatic way to begin a World Cup career than Sandor Kocsis' blistering debut against South Korea in Hungary's opening match at the 1954 World Cup. The Magical Magyars' frontman claimed a hat-trick in a 9-0 win and it was clear that a star had been delivered to the world stage. Kocsis was not finished there, though, and he went on to find the back of the net four times against West Germany in his next game, before claiming another two against Brazil and two more against Uruguay in the semis. Kocsis had not only beaten the previous record set by Brazilian Ademir four years earlier, he had smashed it.
T7. Helmut Rahn (West Germany) 10 goals, 10 matches, 2 tournaments
Over the course of two tournaments, Helmut Rahn, the Gerd Mueller of the 1950s if you will, ensured people sat up and took notice thanks to his formidable feats in front of goal. It might never have been that way though, as the Rot-Weiss Essen striker, nicknamed 'Der Boss', was not included in the original German party set for Switzerland. Having left Germany with his club for a tour of Uruguay, he was eventually recalled to the squad, fortunately for the Germans as he was soon to become the hero of the 'Miracle of Bern', scoring twice, including the winner, in the 3-2 upset of Hungary to lift the World Cup.
T7. Gabriel Batistuta (Argentina) 10 goals, 12 matches, 3 tournaments
Regarded at one of the greatest goal-getters of the 1990s, Gabriel Batistuta's reputation was partly forged and then cemented at World Cup tournaments. In 1994, 'Batigol' scored four, including a hat-trick against Greece in Argentina's opening match, before he added five more to his tally in France four years later, with another hat-trick, this time against Jamaica in Paris, helping bolster his impressive figures. Just one more in the win over Nigeria in 2002 took Batistuta to 10 - ahead of his fellow Argentines Guillermo Stabile, Diego Maradona and Mario Kempes.
T7. Teofilo Cubillas (Peru) 10 goals, 13 matches, 3 tournaments
Peru are not currently a force to be reckoned with in world football, but back in the 1970s when they had Teofilo Cubillas in their line-up, they were. The forward, one of the best South American players ever to grace a pitch, boasts an incredible strike rate at World Cups. In 1970, he was one of the major players in an entertaining tournament in Mexico, scoring five times in four games, one against West Germany and another against Brazil. A star was born. Cubillas missed out on the tournament in 1974 as Peru failed to qualify but he and his team returned in Argentina four years down the track and he repeated his feat of scoring five times, including a hat-trick against Iran. Cubillas was then given a glorious opportunity to add to his tally in 1982, but his 33 years finally caught up with him and was left on 10.
T7. Grzegorz Lato (Poland) 10 goals, 20 matches, 3 tournaments
1974 was a good year for football romantics, particularly if they were watching Poland at the World Cup. Goalkeeper Jan Tomaszewski, captain Kazimierz Deyna and perhaps most of all the attacking trio of Grzegorz Lato, Robert Gadocha and Anderzej Szarmach all captured the public's imagination in Germany. Lato, with seven goals, took home the golden boot and it was his solitary goal against Brazil that gave Poland a remarkable third-place finish. He went one better four years later, scoring twice more against Brazil before reaching his final tally of 10 with an effort against Peru in 1982 as Poland again reached the semi-finals.
- Soccer
- Sports & Recreation
- Klose
- West Germany
- Ronaldo
- Brazil


text:
Starting next month, smokers in Paintsville will have fewer places to smoke as the Paintsville City Council approved a smoking ban in restaurants. This decision was about more than health, it was about business.
Smoking or non-smoking? That question will soon disappear in Paintsville restaurants.
Paintsville City Council approved a smoking ban for restaurants after the health department and the tourism commission requested it. Council members say there wasn't any strong opposition.
"I think in the long run it will be a benefit. It will not be a negative," said Nancy Price, Paintsville Tourism Director.
The group believes the ban will improve not only health, but also business. They say restaurants in other cities with smoking bans saw an increase in sales after their ban went into effect.
"No, there were no negative effects at all," said Vicki Collins, Bob Evans General Manager.
Tourism commissioners want the same in Paintsville.
"That's our job, our money comes from restaurant and hotel-motel tax," Price said.
Restaurant managers say more people want to sit in non-smoking sections. Once the smoking section is gone, there will be more tables to accommodate those customers, which they say makes a big difference on a busy night. Restaurant managers hope more available tables will attract even more people to eat.
"I sure hope so. We'd like to take care of anyone in Paintsville or anyone coming through Paintsville," Collins said.
"It turned out to be a win win for everyone," Price said.
Except for those who like a cigarette with their meal, but the smokers we talked to said they aren't upset with the ban and will just wait until they leave a restaurant before lighting up.
The smoking ban is scheduled to go into effect on January 31st.


text:
A Christian perspective on Budo
View Single Post
Diana Frese
Dojo: Aikikai of S.W. Conn. (formerly)
Location: Stamford Connecticut
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 385
Re: A Christian perspective on Budo
We have a relatively small congregation here, but it does outreach into the community. Families, groups and individuals have visited Haiti, New Orleans and Africa to help out in various endeavors including school founding and disaster relief. One thread to which I submitted posts said that martial arts people and their dojos should actively help others in society at large. Many do, as part of their own dojo's projects in the community, or as individuals. I think that was my answer or what I intended to answer at some point. Many people interested in martial arts also have strong community involvement, teaching disadvantaged young people at no charge, and major charities enlist the help of dojos for fund raising contests and exhibitions. Combatting cancer may be one, and combatting diabetes is another cause dojos across the country are involved in. A person might offer help as a member of a church or other faith community, or if he or she is not part of one, many dojos offer an opportunity to serve others in that way.
The words faith community offer a broader category than what we heard in past decades, "Churches and synagogues." Churches and synagogues were known for their charitable activities, and as other faiths and their congregations in American communities became larger and better known to their neighbors and fellow townspeople, their community service became better known and the category was widened into "faith community." Real estate listings here often mention proximity to Houses of Worship. It could be ease of modern transportation and accessibility of such means, or it could be actual physical proximity due to the restriction of Orthodox Judaism against traveling by car or other transport on the Sabbath. To refer to your mention of the lake, the Sabbath is an opportunity for the soul as lake to be still to reflect God to follow the beautiful example you cited.
In Buddhism, I seem to remember three tenets, the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha, which brings me to the topic of community itself. The Dharma, if I remember correctly, is the Way, what a person does in life, specifically, following the way of the Buddha as passed down in Buddhist Scriptures and by its Patriarchs and later leaders . The Sangha, however is the community and is very important in Buddhism though I don't know the specific teachings about it, I know it is very important. Likewise in Judaism and Christianity and many other religions. Our particular church parish was started in the 1940's as a result of gas (petrol) rationing and thus started as a close community of neighbors whose lives were closely linked already or soon became so. I remember down the road from the church was the nursery school (nursery schools here are now called Pre-K, for pre-Kindergarten) where we played in an imitation train made out of boxlike cars made out of wood by locals and I still have a picture of some of my classmates peering out of the windows.
There is a lot a community, large or small, can do, for those nearby or far, whether it is monetary donations for medicine or a traveling clinic somewhere in the nation or the world, or support for a school somewhere, or individuals traveling to be of help to others. The other side of community is to welcome people who come through the doors of the building or who are met during daily activities around town or anywhere get to know them, or simply offer a referral to something of interest or need or just quietly look friendly so the other person feels he or she might be open to a conversation.
There are so many ways to be a good neighbor just to brighten one's day, even if the neighbor is not lying on the ground beaten and bleeding. It is essential to do what one can or call for help in such cases, but we shouldn't neglect the times when, if our soul at the moment is like the quiet lake, we can sense that the other person could use a kind word or a smile to brighten his or her day.
One of the phrases I learned from a book on Aikido my judo teacher had lent me when I was in college was "produce and protect all beings in Nature' I'm not sure if a Japanese phrase I later heard is its translation, but it seems to be an interesting paraphrase of concepts of Shinto that O Sensei stated in his own way. This fascinated me in the 1960's and I found the general background of O Sensei's beliefs plus the practice in the dojo, which I loved and gave me a chance to approach what I felt to be the closest thing to flying that people are able to do, led me to stay with the dojo for many years.
It was also great to be part of the group. In those days, there were actors studying movement for the stage, a retired police officer, a brewer from New Jersey who was still teaching Aikido after he moved to Florida. There was a picture on the website announcing his eightieth birthday. Many dojo are warm hearted communities doing serious martial arts practice. Good for the body, good for the mind and good for the spirit.
Well, I got carried away by the examples. I hope you find them relevant to your topics
Last edited by Diana Frese : 10-17-2012 at
Diana Frese
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Diana Frese
Visit Diana Frese's AikiBlog


text:
Sustainability: Business and Leadership (SUST5006)
This unit of study will help build your understanding of the knowledge, skills and activities required to lead sustainability and change in, and with, businesses and organisations. The unit presents the relevance and importance of business mission and strategy, and will introduce the roles of corporate social responsibility, social entrepreneurship and impact measurement. It will also explore stakeholders associated with business (including shareholders, consumers and government) and how they can both motivate and impede change in the context of sustainability. Flexible and inclusive models of leadership will be introduced as we seek an appreciation of systems theory and its crucial place in understanding the complex nature of sustainability. Building on an understanding of distributed leadership and the nature of systems, action research and action learning are introduced as ideal frameworks to affect societal and organisational change. Learning will be facilitated through seminars, readings, as well as individual group projects.
Our courses that offer this unit of study
- Executive Master of Arts and Social Sciences
- Executive Master of Public Administration
- Graduate Certificate in Public Administration
- Graduate Certificate in Sustainability
- Graduate Diploma in Public Administration
- Graduate Diploma in Sustainability
- Master of Public Administration
- Master of Sustainability
Further unit of study information
One 2 to 2.5 hour interactive lecture per week presented in an intensive format with up to four hours per week spent on a combination of additional (e.g. on-line) learning tasks, small group sessions and consultation with lecturers.
Essays, short written assignments (100%)
Faculty/department permission required?
Unit of study rules
Study this unit outside a degree
Non-award/non-degree study
If you wish to undertake one or more units of study (subjects) for your own interest but not towards a degree, you may enrol in single units as a non-award student.
Cross-institutional study
If you are from another Australian tertiary institution you may be permitted to underake cross-institutional study in one or more units of study at the University of Sydney.


text:
Kapri Bibbs Survives First Round Of Cuts For BroncosTraining season turns into the dreaded cutting season this week in the National Football League.
Kubiak: Former CSU Star Kapri Bibbs 'Answered The Challenge'While the starting running back job currently belongs to C.J. Anderson, the backup jobs are up for grabs. One player hoping to get into the mix is former Colorado State star Kapri Bibbs.
With Knee On Mend, Devontae Booker Takes Field For BroncosDevontae Booker is just strolling along these days - first across a stage to receive his diploma, and now on a football field at reduced speed with his knee still healing.
Broncos Re-Sign Running Back Ronnie HillmanRunning back Ronnie Hillman has signed a one-year contract to return to the Denver Broncos.
C.J. Anderson Sticking With Team That 'Took A Chance On An Undrafted Kid'The Denver Broncos matched Miami's four-year, $18 million offer to their lead running back on Tuesday.
C.J. Anderson To Stay With The BroncosThe Denver Broncos matched a competing offer for C.J. Anderson, meaning running back will return next season.
Broncos On Verge Of Losing Entire Starting Backfield In 1 WeekIf he leaves for Miami, C.J. Anderson would reunite with former Broncos offensive coordinator Adam Gase, who was named head coach in Miami in January.
Broncos Runners Could Be Key In Super Bowl 50The Denver Broncos' hopes could rest with two under-the-radar running backs who shared the workload this season.
Constructing A Champion: How The Broncos Were BuiltThe Broncos are the 2015 AFC champions largely due to a suffocating defense and roster built with balance.
Patriots Vs. Broncos: The Key MatchupsKey matchups for the AFC championship game Sunday between the New England Patriots and Denver Broncos.
Manning-Brady XVII A Surprising InevitabilityAt various points in the past two months, though, it looked as if neither the New England Patriots nor the Denver Broncos would be in position to set up the 17th duel between Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.
Manning, Broncos Rock On After Win Over SteelersThe Broncos rallied for a 23-16 victory over the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday to move themselves and their 39-year-old quarterback one win away from the Super Bowl.


text:
Jason's Wall
I really wish Medea would stop calling and hanging up.
That's not me.
Then why does your name pop up on my smart phone?
Confound these modern innovations!
Just stop calling, okay?
I'm just hoping that Mermeros or Pheres will answer.
They don't want to talk to you.
I'm their mother!
Aaaaand you killed them.
Nobody's perfect.
Was it really necessary for me to die by being cracked on the head by a rotting piece of the Argo?
We like irony.
likes this.
Argonaut reunion party tomorrow night on the bone-white sands of my Elysium beach house.
Can't wait.
Cool beans.
Bringing my lyre—of course.
Looking forward to seeing the old crew.
Headed down from Olympus.
See you guys there!
Wait a second. You weren't an Argonaut.
What can I say? I love a party.


text:
York AAAE Chapter Hosts Aviation Executives
The student chapter of the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) at York College recently held its 2nd AAAE York College/CUNY Chapter Speaker Series, entitled, "Having an Appropriate Attitude in the Professional Environment."
York College Celebrates Salk Scholarship Winner
Over the course of its 40 years of graduating students, York College has raked up almost 30 Salk Scholars and just added another one.
York's School Of Business and Information Systems Hires Dean
The exhaustive search for a permanent dean has concluded and Dr. Alfred Ngome Ntoko is now Dean designate of the School of Business and Information Systems (SBIS) at York College.
NASA Engineer To Speak At York Graduation
Dr. Aprille Ericsson, an aerospace engineer at National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) will address graduates at York College's 41st commencement exercise on June third, 2011.
Music Professor Tom Zlabinger Blogs From Birthplace of Classical Music
Professor Zlabinger spent his winter break attending and performing at "MOMENT MUSIC Wien 2011," in Vienna, Austria.
York to Add Women's Soccer in Fall 2011
The York College athletics program is pleased to announce the addition of women's soccer as the 17th NCAA Division III sport to its program. The Lady Cardinals will compete in women's soccer starting in the Fall 2011 season.
Children Gain From Take Your Children to Work Day
A group of 28 children explored York College on Thursday, April 28th for the first annual Take Your Children to Work Day.
Community Health Major Hired In Pre-Law Minor
Jodiann Mattis is graduating from York College this spring but she is already enjoying the fruits of her education.
Popular Poet To Keynote Research Day At York
The Second Annual Research Day exhibit and seminar will take place on April 14th, 2011 and will feature the works of York College students from across the disciplines.
York History Major Fields Law School Offers
Camille Wynter, a graduating History major with interest in law, is in a good place. She is graduating with honors from York and heading to law school later in the year.
York Men's Volleyball Rallies From Two Sets Down to Advance to the CUNYAC Semifinals
For the third consecutive season, the York College men's volleyball team has advanced to the semifinals of the CUNY Athletic Conference Championships, thanks to a thrilling come-from-behind victory over rival CCNY in the quarterfinals Tuesday. York overcame a 2-0 deficit to win by a score of 3-2 (21-25, 19-25, 25-22, 32-30,17-15).
York's Marcel Esonwune Named NABC All-American
The National Association of Basketball Coaches (NABC) announced the 2011 State Farm Coaches' Division III All-America Teams and York College senior standout Marcel Esonwune has once again found himself on the team, earning a third-team selection.
Tom Zlabinger and the York College Blue Notes!
Professor Tom Zlabinger and members of his York College Blue Notes are featured in Sunday's edition of the Daily News with quotes from Les Raphael of York's College Now program. Congratulations to all!
Aviation Management Students Intern at China Airlines
Four Aviation Management students are having the opportunity to intern for China Airlines, the main carrier for Taiwan, the Republic of China, with flights to Taipei, its capital city.
Esonwune Wins CUNYAC Player of the Year; Holley and Rice Named to Second Team
York College senior men's basketball standout Marcel Esonwune has been named the 2010-11 CUNY Athletic Conference Men's Basketball Player of the Year, while junior William Holley has been selected to the All-CUNYAC Second Team. Women's basketball player Shadae Rice earned a second-team selection. The awards were announced at the CUNYAC Awards Luncheon at The Water Club in New York City Thursday afternoon
'The Play's The Thing' For Theatre Major
Speech Communication and Theatre Arts Major Stephanie Ogeleza is on fire. The graduating senior has written her second play and will produce, direct and perform in it at the Small Theatre of the Performing Arts Center at York College.
Dabo Scores 1,000th Career Point as York Routs City Tech
York College senior Maimouna Dabo became the fifth York College women's basketball player to reach the 1,000 point plateau in a 69-31 thumping of conference-rival City Tech Wednesday evening.
York College Aviator Studies In Argentina
I was recently awarded the York College Study Abroad/Away Grant and the 2010-2011 Gloria Waldman Study Abroad Scholarship to participate in the City College – UNTREF (Universidad de Tres de Febrero) Buenos Aires Study Abroad Program from January 2nd to January 24th in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
York College Alum Appointed President of CUNY College
The CUNY Board of Trustees has appointed Dr. Carole Berotte Joseph, a member of the York College Class of 1971, as president of Bronx Community College (BCC) effective July 18, 2011.
YC Merit Scholars 'Rebuild' New Orleans
In early January (2011) a small group of York College students enjoyed a new experience as volunteer participants in a community service program in New Orleans.


text:
Do ageing SCs enhance Parkinson's?
Lisbon – A Portuguese-American research team has discovered an association between a variant in the gene DZIP1 and Parkinson's disease (PD). The collaboration brought André Valente from the Biocant Biotechnology Innovation Center in Cantanhede together with colleagues from Johns Hopkins University (Yuan Gao, Joo Heon Shin) and the Catholic University of America (Abhijit Sarkar). The team found that a rare mutation in the gene may quadruple an individual's risk of contracting the disease. Given the role of DZIP1 in regulating adult stem cell niches, this association is consistent with adult stem cells playing a part in PD – a theory previously proposed at Biocant. The researchers proposed in arXiv Quantitative Biology (arXiv:1109.0029v2) that PD might originate in a programme defect that is associated with ageing stem-cells.


text: Lancers survive fun bike run from SHS to Pittsburg CHEROKEE - The USD 247 Southeast first semester of the 2016-17 school year started Wednesday August 24. While most students and staff used their first Saturday morning back to catch up on some sleep and rest, 14 members of the Lancers Cross Country team chose to do something different. They got up early and took turns running and riding bicycles the 12.4 miles from Southeast High School in Cherokee to Harry's Cafe in Pittsburg. It's an idea second year coach Laney Lawson took from another coach and implemented last year... Aug 27 at 8:12 PM


text:
Do you ever sometimes feel less than intelligent? Perhaps you think you have a rudimentary grasp of science and technology but one day when you're faced with something particularly complex, you feel a bit inadequate and question your own intelligence. Yeah, that's where I am now after seeing the Furutech Powerflux Power Cord. It costs $1,800 and while the company provides ample reason for the high price tag, I can't say I understand a bit of it.
For instance, the "conductors are 68-strand α (Alpha) OCC twisted around μ–conductor strands with a special-grade PE insulation or dielectric." Um, okay! They go on to explain that the conductors are OCC wire that have been treated with the the company's Alpha Cryogenic and Demagnetizing process.
There's RoHS-compliant PVC, carbon powder, braid shields and more. There's even an outer sheath of PVC that has a Nylon braid jacket. And the connectors are a part of the Piezo Ceramic series that feature carbon fiber and acetal copolymer with nonmagnetic stainless steel bands surrounding it. And I don't think I can go on. It's too much. Brain may explode.
[via OhGizmo!]


text:
This weekend actually felt like Fall, which is always a bonus in my book! I loved being able to have the air conditioning turned off, and the windows open. This week's Souper Bowl Sunday recipe is a Shrimp Bisque recipe from Tyler Florence. I love seafood, and a nice creamy soup, so I thought this was the perfect recipe to try!
- 1 1/2 pounds shrimp, shelled and deveined, shells reserved
- Extra-virgin olive oil
- 1 stick (8 tablespoons) unsalted butter
- 2 leeks, trimmed, halved lengthwise, and rinsed well
- 3 stalks celery, cut into big chunks
- 2 carrots, cut into big chunks
- 3 sprigs fresh thyme
- 1 bay leaf
- 2 strips orange zest
- 2 tablespoons tomato paste
- 1/4 cup brandy
- 3 tablespoons all-purpose flour
- 4 cups heavy cream
- Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper
- Finely grated orange zest, for garnish
- Finely chopped fresh chives, for garnish
Heat 3 tablespoons olive oil in a large pot over medium heat and melt the butter into it.
Then add the shrimp shells, the leeks, celery, carrots, 3 sprigs thyme, the bay leaf, orange zest, and tomato paste. Cook, stirring every now and then, until the shells are red and the vegetables are soft, about 10 minutes.
Take the pot off the heat and carefully pour in the brandy. Ignite the brandy with a long kitchen match and let burn until the flame subsides.
Return the pot to the heat, sprinkle in the flour, give it a stir, and cook for another 2 minutes. Now add water to cover and deglaze, scraping up all the browned bits on the bottom of the pot with a wooden spoon.
Add the cream and bring to a boil.
Immediately turn the heat down to low and gently simmer until the soup is reduced and thickened, 30 to 45 minutes.
Simmer for 30 minutes or until thickened
Strain into a clean pot and season with salt and pepper.
Strain the Bisque – nice & smooth!
Chop the shrimp. Return the bisque to a simmer, add the shrimp and cook 2 to 3 minutes just to cook the shrimp through. Give the bisque a final taste for seasoning, pour it into warmed soup bowls and serve garnished with the orange zest and chives.
I usually make some sort of change to the recipe, and this was no exception. Except that this time I only made two changes! I usually change up a bunch of things, but I really like the way this recipe was written. One change that I made had to do with the cream. It calls for 4 cups of heavy cream. I decided to use 2 cups of heavy cream and 2 cups of light cream. I've had luck in the past with making this change, so I figured I'd try it out here. The second thing I did differently had to do with the water that you add. I added some seafood stock (made with Penzeys Seafood Soup Base) in place of the water because I figured it would give that extra depth. I ended up adding in 1 1/2 cups, and that seemed to work out well.
I really loved the flavor that the orange zest gave it. It was very subtle, but it added a lot of flavor, if that makes any sense. I definitely wouldn't skip that part. At first I thought it sounded kind of odd, but I wanted to try it. And I'm so glad that I did. I loved it. This Shrimp Bisque really was delicious. I loved how creamy and flavorful it was. I would say the biggest pain in the butt was straining the soup, but it's something that really has to be done. It's not difficult to do, it's just a little time consuming. But it's definitely worth it in the end.
I want to try this recipe but doing a Lobster Bisque. I'll definitely share it with you all when I do.


text:
"The first time I used the Downpour in action, I was caught in the worst rainstorm I'd ever seen. Luckily, I brought my Downpour Jacket and I stayed completely dry the whole time. The brushed outer face and full leg zips make this an absolute must for the whitetail hunting application."
- Sitka Athlete Jeff Simpson
See How Downpour Jacket Fits Into Jeff 's System


text:
The Portrait of a Lady
by Henry James
The Portrait of a Lady Theme of Women and Femininity
The Portrait of a Lady is not simply the portrait of one single woman – instead, it reveals to us a whole range of different women, all of whom are emblematic of their time, the late nineteenth century. We see an example of the modern career gal as well as a traditional, proper-to-a-fault, obedient Victorian daughter, and everything that falls between these two extremes. In the novel, Henry James presents the state of women in general as he saw it – in relation to men, in relation to each other, and in relation to society on the whole.
Questions About Women and Femininity
- In Henrietta Stackpole, James paints a picture of the woman of the Future – in hindsight, is it accurate?
- Does Henrietta's eventual marriage mean that the image of female independence from men that she represents is a false one?
- How does Isabel compare to a new woman, like Henrietta, or a traditional one, like Pansy?
- Does James set up any of the women in this novel as a feminine ideal?
Chew on This
Isabel is an ideal woman, placed in a flawed world.
Henrietta Stackpole's character represents both the anxieties and hopes of the Victorian man towards the modern woman.


text:
Style Tips for Heart Face ShapeJan 16
If you don't know what heart face shape is, it's basically where you have a very small jaw line and it's not very defined maybe a pointed chin,sometimes you do, sometimes you don't it really depends on the person but the main thing is that you have a wide forehead. So, a kind of a bigger forehead. So that's like the opposite of a square shape.
You can definitely pull off the fringe. You know you have the forehead so it's gonna minimize your forehead if you wear a fringe. So also if you want to you could wear flip textiles, because flip textiles are gonna really add some volume to this section, so the lower part of your face .
Also straight styles are gonna look good on you rather than layer styles because again, they just bring volume to this section so the lower part of your face.
A good example of a celebrity that has a heart shape face is Marilyn Monroe. She had a heart shape face and you know she was renowned for her bob, short bob whether it was curly, wavy or straight it suited her really well. You wanna stay away from pull back styles, so anything that really is gonna emphasize your forehead like a pullback style it's not gonna be right flattering on you.
For in terms of styles in earrings, you can have fun with that. You can basically pick, pretty much pick any style you want so you're very very lucky. So whether it's a disc earring like this, or whether it is something like this, a long one, It really doesn't matter.
The one thing I will say is the bigger the earring, the better for your face shape because the more volume it's gonna bring to your jaw. Go for something with a lot of angles in it and that's kind of interesting and unique and it can look something even like this, that's kind a cool shape, I think, you know it's kinda draw the attention to here rather than your forehead which is the wider part.
When you're picking sunglasses you definitely want to go for something framelss glasses so if you don't know what that means it means that basically it's very self-explanatory it just means it doesn't have frames on. So don't go for dark frames, don't go for prominent frames, just go for frameless ones that you really can hardly even tell that you're wearing glassess coz you don't wanna widen out this part, you wanna keep it to a minimum.


text:
The Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office received a federal grant administered by the Louisiana Highway Safety Commission.
The grant will fund overtime pay for deputies who conduct additional traffic safety enforcement outside of normal patrols. This will include DWI and seatbelt checkpoints.
The focus this year:
Occupant protection in trucks
Child passenger safety
Monitoring impaired driving
Specifics of each detail will not be released in advance.
Sheriff Jason Ard says, 'residents are urged to drive carefully and comply with all Louisiana traffic regulations. The goal is to protect residents and their families.'
Home | Inmate List | Deputy Tools | Employment | Search | About Us | Divisions | Community | Taxes/Sales/Fines | Contacts | Site Map
© Copyright 2016, Livingston Parish Sheriffs Office. All rights reserved.


text:
Definition of aerodynamic in English:
1Relating to aerodynamics: aerodynamic forces
More example sentences
- Downforce is the combination of aerodynamic and centrifugal forces.
- In flight, interactions between aerodynamic forces and a flexing airframe induce vibrations.
- Integrating the effects of either the pressure or the velocity determines the aerodynamic force on an object.
1.1Of or having a shape which reduces the drag from air moving past: the plane has a more aerodynamic shape
More example sentences
- The slimmer shape and aerodynamic design also lessens wind noise and reduces fuel consumption.
- The bicycles are designed to reduce aerodynamic drag caused by the machine itself and the rider's racing position.
- Many hybrids use aerodynamic design to reduce drag and improve fuel efficiency.
- Example sentences
- The aerodynamically efficient body has a drag coefficient of 0.26, contributing to excellent noise insulation for the cabin and fuel economy.
- The Flying Nun's habit just did not look aerodynamically sound.
- And I don't think a formation of 9 would be aerodynamically stable either.
Words that rhyme with aerodynamicbalsamic, ceramic, cryptogamic, cycloramic, dynamic, hydrodynamic, Islamic, panoramic, psychodynamic, thermodynamic
For editors and proofreaders
Line breaks: aero|dynam¦ic
Definition of aerodynamic in:
What do you find interesting about this word or phrase?
Comments that don't adhere to our Community Guidelines may be moderated or removed.
= trending