#impactinvestment — Public Fediverse posts

The Wells Investment, South Korea’s independent VC, is selling its 24.4% stake in impact investor MYSC to secure liquidity, with MYSC considering a partial buyback to strengthen management control.
#YonhapInfomax #TheWellsInvestment #MYSC #StakeSale #ImpactInvestment #Liquidity #Economics #FinancialMarkets #Banking #Securities #Bonds #StockMarket
https://en.infomaxai.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=67151

And one of the major issues for freedom of press is economic independence.

“Guaranteeing freedom, independence and plurality in today’s media landscape requires stable and transparent financial conditions. Without economic independence, there can be no free press. When news media are financially strained, they are drawn into a race to attract audiences at the expense of quality reporting, and can fall prey to the oligarchs and public authorities who seek to exploit them. When journalists are impoverished, they no longer have the means to resist the enemies of the press — those who champion disinformation and propaganda. The media economy must urgently be restored to a state that is conducive to journalism and ensures the production of reliable information, which is inherently costly. Solutions exist and must be deployed on a large scale. The media’s financial independence is a necessary condition for ensuring free, trustworthy information that serves the public interest.”

- Anne Bocandé -
RSF Editorial Director

Thus, if somebody reads this who has too much money lying on their bank accounts (of course, the 1% or 0.1% is here in the fediverse!):

You can be part of the solution. We all know rich oligarchs buying media in order to turn the world into a fascist hell, no?

So, why not financing independent media while committing to their independence?

There is a very interesting media fund, called MDIF:

"MDIF provides debt and equity financing supported by strategic advice to independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat."

https://www.mdif.org/

You won't make a lot of profit with this investment. But at least your money on the bank doesn't make the world worse.

(yes, personally I believe more in radical media collectives, but the scale here is a different one).

@Meron

#Finance #SustainableFinance #Investment #WealthManagement #FinancingMedia
#ImpactInvestment #ImpactInvesting #MDIF #Wealth #IndependentMedia #RealPolitik

And one of the major issues for freedom of press is economic independence.

“Guaranteeing freedom, independence and plurality in today’s media landscape requires stable and transparent financial conditions. Without economic independence, there can be no free press. When news media are financially strained, they are drawn into a race to attract audiences at the expense of quality reporting, and can fall prey to the oligarchs and public authorities who seek to exploit them. When journalists are impoverished, they no longer have the means to resist the enemies of the press — those who champion disinformation and propaganda. The media economy must urgently be restored to a state that is conducive to journalism and ensures the production of reliable information, which is inherently costly. Solutions exist and must be deployed on a large scale. The media’s financial independence is a necessary condition for ensuring free, trustworthy information that serves the public interest.”

- Anne Bocandé -
RSF Editorial Director

Thus, if somebody reads this who has too much money lying on their bank accounts (of course, the 1% or 0.1% is here in the fediverse!):

You can be part of the solution. We all know rich oligarchs buying media in order to turn the world into a fascist hell, no?

So, why not financing independent media while committing to their independence?

There is a very interesting media fund, called MDIF:

"MDIF provides debt and equity financing supported by strategic advice to independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat."

https://www.mdif.org/

You won't make a lot of profit with this investment. But at least your money on the bank doesn't make the world worse.

(yes, personally I believe more in radical media collectives, but the scale here is a different one).

@Meron

#Finance #SustainableFinance #Investment #WealthManagement #FinancingMedia
#ImpactInvestment #ImpactInvesting #MDIF #Wealth #IndependentMedia #RealPolitik

And one of the major issues for freedom of press is economic independence.

“Guaranteeing freedom, independence and plurality in today’s media landscape requires stable and transparent financial conditions. Without economic independence, there can be no free press. When news media are financially strained, they are drawn into a race to attract audiences at the expense of quality reporting, and can fall prey to the oligarchs and public authorities who seek to exploit them. When journalists are impoverished, they no longer have the means to resist the enemies of the press — those who champion disinformation and propaganda. The media economy must urgently be restored to a state that is conducive to journalism and ensures the production of reliable information, which is inherently costly. Solutions exist and must be deployed on a large scale. The media’s financial independence is a necessary condition for ensuring free, trustworthy information that serves the public interest.”

- Anne Bocandé -
RSF Editorial Director

Thus, if somebody reads this who has too much money lying on their bank accounts (of course, the 1% or 0.1% is here in the fediverse!):

You can be part of the solution. We all know rich oligarchs buying media in order to turn the world into a fascist hell, no?

So, why not financing independent media while committing to their independence?

There is a very interesting media fund, called MDIF:

"MDIF provides debt and equity financing supported by strategic advice to independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat."

https://www.mdif.org/

You won't make a lot of profit with this investment. But at least your money on the bank doesn't make the world worse.

(yes, personally I believe more in radical media collectives, but the scale here is a different one).

@Meron

#Finance #SustainableFinance #Investment #WealthManagement #FinancingMedia
#ImpactInvestment #ImpactInvesting #MDIF #Wealth #IndependentMedia #RealPolitik

And one of the major issues for freedom of press is economic independence.

“Guaranteeing freedom, independence and plurality in today’s media landscape requires stable and transparent financial conditions. Without economic independence, there can be no free press. When news media are financially strained, they are drawn into a race to attract audiences at the expense of quality reporting, and can fall prey to the oligarchs and public authorities who seek to exploit them. When journalists are impoverished, they no longer have the means to resist the enemies of the press — those who champion disinformation and propaganda. The media economy must urgently be restored to a state that is conducive to journalism and ensures the production of reliable information, which is inherently costly. Solutions exist and must be deployed on a large scale. The media’s financial independence is a necessary condition for ensuring free, trustworthy information that serves the public interest.”

- Anne Bocandé -
RSF Editorial Director

Thus, if somebody reads this who has too much money lying on their bank accounts (of course, the 1% or 0.1% is here in the fediverse!):

You can be part of the solution. We all know rich oligarchs buying media in order to turn the world into a fascist hell, no?

So, why not financing independent media while committing to their independence?

There is a very interesting media fund, called MDIF:

"MDIF provides debt and equity financing supported by strategic advice to independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat."

https://www.mdif.org/

You won't make a lot of profit with this investment. But at least your money on the bank doesn't make the world worse.

(yes, personally I believe more in radical media collectives, but the scale here is a different one).

@Meron

#Finance #SustainableFinance #Investment #WealthManagement #FinancingMedia
#ImpactInvestment #ImpactInvesting #MDIF #Wealth #IndependentMedia #RealPolitik

And one of the major issues for freedom of press is economic independence.

“Guaranteeing freedom, independence and plurality in today’s media landscape requires stable and transparent financial conditions. Without economic independence, there can be no free press. When news media are financially strained, they are drawn into a race to attract audiences at the expense of quality reporting, and can fall prey to the oligarchs and public authorities who seek to exploit them. When journalists are impoverished, they no longer have the means to resist the enemies of the press — those who champion disinformation and propaganda. The media economy must urgently be restored to a state that is conducive to journalism and ensures the production of reliable information, which is inherently costly. Solutions exist and must be deployed on a large scale. The media’s financial independence is a necessary condition for ensuring free, trustworthy information that serves the public interest.”

- Anne Bocandé -
RSF Editorial Director

Thus, if somebody reads this who has too much money lying on their bank accounts (of course, the 1% or 0.1% is here in the fediverse!):

You can be part of the solution. We all know rich oligarchs buying media in order to turn the world into a fascist hell, no?

So, why not financing independent media while committing to their independence?

There is a very interesting media fund, called MDIF:

"MDIF provides debt and equity financing supported by strategic advice to independent media in countries where access to reliable news and information is under threat."

https://www.mdif.org/

You won't make a lot of profit with this investment. But at least your money on the bank doesn't make the world worse.

(yes, personally I believe more in radical media collectives, but the scale here is a different one).

@Meron

#Finance #SustainableFinance #Investment #WealthManagement #FinancingMedia
#ImpactInvestment #ImpactInvesting #MDIF #Wealth #IndependentMedia #RealPolitik

This week on STEAM Powered, our conversation is with Rumee Singh, CEO, Co-Founder & Tech Entrepreneur.

Not everyone has that pivotal moment where they realise what they want to do with their life, and that's okay. The important thing is to be open to ideas and opportunities even if they may take you a different direction.

Join us as Rumee shares the full-circle journey that brought her home, and building solutions that make an impact in her community.

Watch or listen at: https://link.chtbl.com/steampowered

Show Notes at https://steampoweredshow.com/shows/rumee-singh

#SocialImpact #community #ImpactInvestment #MITSolve #GSMAInnovationFund #UNICEFinnovate

This week on STEAM Powered, our conversation is with Rumee Singh, CEO, Co-Founder & Tech Entrepreneur.

Not everyone has that pivotal moment where they realise what they want to do with their life, and that's okay. The important thing is to be open to ideas and opportunities even if they may take you a different direction.

Join us as Rumee shares the full-circle journey that brought her home, and building solutions that make an impact in her community.

Watch or listen at: https://link.chtbl.com/steampowered

Show Notes at https://steampoweredshow.com/shows/rumee-singh

#SocialImpact #community #ImpactInvestment #MITSolve #GSMAInnovationFund #UNICEFinnovate

In some pockets of rich people's society things like impact investment (not only expecting monetary returns, but also a positive effect on society) are becoming popular.

However
a) still a niche (>60% of their money remains at the stock market, a chunk real estate and most greedy overlords still hoard gold...).
b) its still capitalism, just companies with some small positive side effects (think about companies doing renewable energies, recycling, organic farming...). But still growth-oriented and usually *some* percentage return is expected.
c) there is building a whole greenwashing and "you are the hero" industry around these well-meaning rich people. Of course.
d) the focus on economically depressed regions leads to very creepy situations when the objective is to "provide the poor with affordable basic services" like housing, telecommunication or healthcare, or giving loans to female farmers in Guatemala. And while this has indeed some positive effects and might create jobs and improve the situation of the target groups, it is deeply questionable when the uber-wealthy get richer by selling something to people below the poverty line.

That said, impact investment is at least a step in the right direction, since it decreases the underlying obsession to multiply capital, but to try to break less things on the way and maybe doing even something good. I prefer having them bragging at the golf club "hey, one of my start-ups is providing menstrual hygiene products to schoolgirls in central africa" than the stuff they are currently talking about. But then again we have the power issue, similar as in philantropy: who decides what is "positive impact"? Some religious folks could think that it is a good thing to invest altruistically in a company that offers homophobic and antiabortist SexEd in schools. Or an oligarch buys a newspaper. Or twitter...

We can't let and don't need to leave these decisions to them. Hard cap on wealth at 10 millions.

@JulieB @pa

#TaxTheRich #ImpactInvestment #AngelInvestor #Philantropy #SustainableFinance

In some pockets of rich people's society things like impact investment (not only expecting monetary returns, but also a positive effect on society) are becoming popular.

However
a) still a niche (>60% of their money remains at the stock market, a chunk real estate and most greedy overlords still hoard gold...).
b) its still capitalism, just companies with some small positive side effects (think about companies doing renewable energies, recycling, organic farming...). But still growth-oriented and usually *some* percentage return is expected.
c) there is building a whole greenwashing and "you are the hero" industry around these well-meaning rich people. Of course.
d) the focus on economically depressed regions leads to very creepy situations when the objective is to "provide the poor with affordable basic services" like housing, telecommunication or healthcare, or giving loans to female farmers in Guatemala. And while this has indeed some positive effects and might create jobs and improve the situation of the target groups, it is deeply questionable when the uber-wealthy get richer by selling something to people below the poverty line.

That said, impact investment is at least a step in the right direction, since it decreases the underlying obsession to multiply capital, but to try to break less things on the way and maybe doing even something good. I prefer having them bragging at the golf club "hey, one of my start-ups is providing menstrual hygiene products to schoolgirls in central africa" than the stuff they are currently talking about. But then again we have the power issue, similar as in philantropy: who decides what is "positive impact"? Some religious folks could think that it is a good thing to invest altruistically in a company that offers homophobic and antiabortist SexEd in schools. Or an oligarch buys a newspaper. Or twitter...

We can't let and don't need to leave these decisions to them. Hard cap on wealth at 10 millions.

@JulieB @pa

#TaxTheRich #ImpactInvestment #AngelInvestor #Philantropy #SustainableFinance

In some pockets of rich people's society things like impact investment (not only expecting monetary returns, but also a positive effect on society) are becoming popular.

However
a) still a niche (>60% of their money remains at the stock market, a chunk real estate and most greedy overlords still hoard gold...).
b) its still capitalism, just companies with some small positive side effects (think about companies doing renewable energies, recycling, organic farming...). But still growth-oriented and usually *some* percentage return is expected.
c) there is building a whole greenwashing and "you are the hero" industry around these well-meaning rich people. Of course.
d) the focus on economically depressed regions leads to very creepy situations when the objective is to "provide the poor with affordable basic services" like housing, telecommunication or healthcare, or giving loans to female farmers in Guatemala. And while this has indeed some positive effects and might create jobs and improve the situation of the target groups, it is deeply questionable when the uber-wealthy get richer by selling something to people below the poverty line.

That said, impact investment is at least a step in the right direction, since it decreases the underlying obsession to multiply capital, but to try to break less things on the way and maybe doing even something good. I prefer having them bragging at the golf club "hey, one of my start-ups is providing menstrual hygiene products to schoolgirls in central africa" than the stuff they are currently talking about. But then again we have the power issue, similar as in philantropy: who decides what is "positive impact"? Some religious folks could think that it is a good thing to invest altruistically in a company that offers homophobic and antiabortist SexEd in schools. Or an oligarch buys a newspaper. Or twitter...

We can't let and don't need to leave these decisions to them. Hard cap on wealth at 10 millions.

@JulieB @pa

#TaxTheRich #ImpactInvestment #AngelInvestor #Philantropy #SustainableFinance

In some pockets of rich people's society things like impact investment (not only expecting monetary returns, but also a positive effect on society) are becoming popular.

However
a) still a niche (>60% of their money remains at the stock market, a chunk real estate and most greedy overlords still hoard gold...).
b) its still capitalism, just companies with some small positive side effects (think about companies doing renewable energies, recycling, organic farming...). But still growth-oriented and usually *some* percentage return is expected.
c) there is building a whole greenwashing and "you are the hero" industry around these well-meaning rich people. Of course.
d) the focus on economically depressed regions leads to very creepy situations when the objective is to "provide the poor with affordable basic services" like housing, telecommunication or healthcare, or giving loans to female farmers in Guatemala. And while this has indeed some positive effects and might create jobs and improve the situation of the target groups, it is deeply questionable when the uber-wealthy get richer by selling something to people below the poverty line.

That said, impact investment is at least a step in the right direction, since it decreases the underlying obsession to multiply capital, but to try to break less things on the way and maybe doing even something good. I prefer having them bragging at the golf club "hey, one of my start-ups is providing menstrual hygiene products to schoolgirls in central africa" than the stuff they are currently talking about. But then again we have the power issue, similar as in philantropy: who decides what is "positive impact"? Some religious folks could think that it is a good thing to invest altruistically in a company that offers homophobic and antiabortist SexEd in schools. Or an oligarch buys a newspaper. Or twitter...

We can't let and don't need to leave these decisions to them. Hard cap on wealth at 10 millions.

@JulieB @pa

#TaxTheRich #ImpactInvestment #AngelInvestor #Philantropy #SustainableFinance

In some pockets of rich people's society things like impact investment (not only expecting monetary returns, but also a positive effect on society) are becoming popular.

However
a) still a niche (>60% of their money remains at the stock market, a chunk real estate and most greedy overlords still hoard gold...).
b) its still capitalism, just companies with some small positive side effects (think about companies doing renewable energies, recycling, organic farming...). But still growth-oriented and usually *some* percentage return is expected.
c) there is building a whole greenwashing and "you are the hero" industry around these well-meaning rich people. Of course.
d) the focus on economically depressed regions leads to very creepy situations when the objective is to "provide the poor with affordable basic services" like housing, telecommunication or healthcare, or giving loans to female farmers in Guatemala. And while this has indeed some positive effects and might create jobs and improve the situation of the target groups, it is deeply questionable when the uber-wealthy get richer by selling something to people below the poverty line.

That said, impact investment is at least a step in the right direction, since it decreases the underlying obsession to multiply capital, but to try to break less things on the way and maybe doing even something good. I prefer having them bragging at the golf club "hey, one of my start-ups is providing menstrual hygiene products to schoolgirls in central africa" than the stuff they are currently talking about. But then again we have the power issue, similar as in philantropy: who decides what is "positive impact"? Some religious folks could think that it is a good thing to invest altruistically in a company that offers homophobic and antiabortist SexEd in schools. Or an oligarch buys a newspaper. Or twitter...

We can't let and don't need to leave these decisions to them. Hard cap on wealth at 10 millions.

@JulieB @pa

#TaxTheRich #ImpactInvestment #AngelInvestor #Philantropy #SustainableFinance

Another way to invest and take part in the life of such #coop companies is to join an #impactInvestment club. In #France, #CIGALES (=cicadas #JeanDeLaFontaine) organises a networkk of such clubs: 10 to 15 people pool 20-100€/month and join investment meetings where would-be #entrepreneurs present their projects. A club typically invest €2k per project for 5 years, helping the start-up to get more funding from banks and public investors.
Club members also give of their time when useful.

3/3

They also ask what sorts of actions one takes and are not covered by the study. I'll take the opportunity to post it here too:

One can also engage (even with limited personal funds) into #impactInvestment in #coop sector companies that act on #sustainable alternatives. Some national regulations make it easier than others, in #France there are a few good things. I'd be happy to hear about their counterparts elsewhere.

#ESS #EconomieSocialeSolidaire

1/3

A key aspect of Boston Impact Initiative's work is to train and support emerging fund managers of color who are starting their own place-based #impactinvestment funds to advance racial and economic justice. On May 2, they're launching our third cohort. Learn more and apply by April 16! https://bostonimpact.org/events/spring-2023-cohort/ #solidarityeconomy #professionaldevelopment #solidarityfinance #economicjustice

Bizarre things happen when ESG meets BSAU in the US Senate.

(I see four options. What do you see?)

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sowhat-happens-when-esg-meets-bsau-us-senate-gil-friend/?published=t

#ESG #BSAU #ImpactInvestment #SustainableBusiness #climatecrisis #finance #FiduciaryDuty