Pinnacle NAB interview here.  Anyone a Pinnacle expert?  PLease tell us more if you are.

pinnaclesys.com

What they say about the Internet plan.......

Pinnacle Systems Details Internet Product Strategy 

Pinnacle Systems? iCreate, iStore, iStream, iView Products Provide the Infrastructure to Enable Rich Media Sharing over the Internet 

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. , 5/15/2000? Pinnacle Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: PCLE), a leader in digital media solutions, today detailed its Internet product strategy for providing rich media creation, storage, streaming and viewing over the web, which Pinnacle Systems calls its iCreate, iStore, iStream, iView product strategy. 
?Pinnacle Systems? has leveraged its core competencies to address important new markets enabled by the Internet, and has recently launched several initiatives as part of this strategy. Our intention is to position Pinnacle Systems as a leading player in developing end-to-end infrastructure solutions for web based rich media, ? said Mark Sanders, CEO and president of Pinnacle Systems. ?Pinnacle Systems is developing key elements of its iCreate, iStore, iStream, iView strategy internally and is also aggressively developing partnership arrangements with a number of companies to more rapidly pursue these exciting opportunities,? Sanders added. 

iCreate Solutions
Pinnacle Systems? iCreate solutions enable direct and easy export to Internet streaming formats of original content created using Pinnacle Systems? video content creation solutions. Pinnacle Systems? professional video non-linear editing products imbed interfaces to Microsoft (MSFT) Windows Media Encoder, Real Networks (RNWK) RealProducer and Apple?s (AAPL) Quicktime streaming media encoders. Pinnacle Systems latest product, the TARGA 3000, provides powerful editing and compositing capabilities for resolution independent digital video creation. Further, Pinnacle Systems? Studio line of consumer movie-making products have been designed to incorporate a direct ?publish to the web? feature, to easily share videos on the Internet. The iCreate solutions give high performance web content creation power to the expanding universe of Pinnacle Systems? content creation solutions. 

iStore Solutions
Pinnacle Systems? iStore solutions enable direct and easy export of previously created content to Internet streaming formats. Pinnacle Systems video servers and its StreamFactory Live Web Media Encoder are enabled to stream video over the Internet using either Microsoft or Real Networks protocols. Pinnacle Systems also plans to support MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 formats for broadband web streaming in environments where high quality content is critical. This includes incorporation of streaming protocols to allow IP multicasting of high-quality images over corporate and institutional networks for applications such as training, education, and messaging. Pinnacle Systems? iStore solutions become especially compelling as Broadband networks such as DSL and ADSL become widely deployed. 

iStream Solutions
Pinnacle Systems? iStream solutions enable direct and easy webcast of live media content over the Internet. Pinnacle Systems is leveraging its ?on-air? expertise and technology used by broadcasters worldwide to create a family of live or ?on-web? production systems. The first of this line of products, Pinnacle Systems? StreamGenie, enables users to create live multicamera productions on location--with camera mixes, titling, and special effects--then webcast at multiple bit-rates in both Real Networks and Microsoft streaming formats. Further, Pinnacle Systems is entering into alliances with Internet infrastructure ASPs to offer webcasters an easy mechanism for initiating a live webcast from any location. The first of these partnerships is with Video Networks Inc. (VNI). Pinnacle Systems and VNI will direct webcasting traffic initiated by Pinnacle Systems? StreamGenie users to a portal sponsored by both companies who will share in the proceeds from these live webcasts. Pinnacle Systems? iStream solutions include a family of live webcasting products including portable solutions, low profile rack-mount solutions, and PC-based solutions to serve the need of a burgeoning community of webcasters who plan to leverage broadband on the web. 

iView Solutions
Pinnacle Systems? iView solutions enable direct viewing of TV broadcasts on a PC as well as distribution and sharing of videos over broadband Internet connections. Pinnacle Systems has enhanced its PC tuner card franchise with the introduction of its Webtext feature. Webtext leverages the Teletext transmission over the television spectrum, which is very popular in Europe, to provide relevant web links for additional information on selected Teletext topics. In addition, Pinnacle Systems has recently announced PC-HDTV, allowing direct viewing of high-definition TV content on your PC. In addition, PC-HDTV has the capability to decode Internet content embedded in the new 19.2 Mbit/sec digital broadcast channels. Pinnacle Systems has entered into a relationship with WaveExpress to enable data encoded by broadcasters to be decoded on Pinnacle Systems? PCTV cards using WaveExpress technology. 

About Pinnacle Systems, Inc. 

What Pinnacle said at NAB this yr.....

HOST LOWITZ:
Good morning and welcome to the pact of the Internet on Broadcasting. I think we're about ready to start here. I would like to introduce myself. My name is Greg Lowitz. I'm the director of Webcasting Solutions Business for Pinnacle Systems in Mountain View. 

We're glad to have you here today, and we have, I think, a very exciting interchange about the impact of the internet on broadcasting. What we tried to do here is line up a very talented, a very senior group of people who represent the complete value chain from content creation all the way through distribution, to the end user, including a lot of the infrastructure as well. 

What I would like to do is briefly introduce who the panelists and a little bit about their background, and then introduce Gary Schultz, our moderator. 

Before I do that I would like to share a couple of ideas with you that were sort of reflection points in my life that brought me into the Internet space. A couple years ago we had our second child, and I had less and less time to watch television, five minutes here and ten minutes there, to catch the news and information. 

I started getting more and more of my content and information online because it was available when I wanted it, at a time that was convenient for me, and then in January we got connected to broadband DSL service. Now at home we have a megawidth per second of bandwidth, and we sort of change our moto. We leave our computer on most of the day, and whenever we want information and news, we just go online and get it very quickly. 

So I've noticed in my own life a change in my viewing patterns, watching less traditional television and more online. I started talking to all my friends and finding similar things. We thought it would be interesting to have a panel to discuss the impact of Internet on broadcasting, and the content of broadcasting, as we know it, isn't going away but it's changing. 

In fact, you look at the Broadcasters Show Daily, which I have a copy of right here, I think what's significant is that two out of the five front page articles are on webstreaming and the Internet. 

So clearly there is a change going on, and if you go over to the Sands Convention Center, I think we all see that happening. 

So without any further adieu, I would like to go ahead and introduce our panelists. Just kind of going in alphabetical order by company, Paul Campbell, who is vice-president of marketing and strategic planning with Akamai Networks, Akamai Technologies, which is a company that is a leader today in broadband distribution of content. So welcome, Paul. We're delighted to have you here. Previous to working at Akamai, Paul was with Network 24, which was recently acquired. 

Next to Paul we have Rich Lappenbusch, who is a director of strategic planning with Microsoft in the digital media division. Rich also brings a lot of experience. He's previously been with MSNBC in a lot of other capacities. So I think he can bring an interesting perspective on a combination of traditional broadcasting and infusion of the Internet with this new media world. So welcome. 

Next to Rich we have my boss, Ajay Chopra, who is the chairman and also the cofounder of Pinnacle. He co-founded Pinnacle Systems at the age of 29, and I think the track record speaks for itself, and we're delighted to have Ajay here as well joining us. 

Next to Ajay we have Clint Chao, who is the vice-president of marketing at SkyStream Networks, an up and coming company that's part of the infrastructure that is putting IP video over broadcast television, and this is part of the new generation of infrastructure that is helping the infusion of the Internet to broadcasting come into place. So welcome, Clint. Thank you for being here. 

Next to Clint we have Suzanne Donino, who is senior vice-president of the Turner Entertainment Network out of Atlanta and, of course, there is lot of interesting things coming out lately about media companies and Internet companies getting together. Suzanne can provide some interesting perspectives on that. 

Speaking of perspectives, Suzanne has been a real pioneer in the area of media management. In fact, a couple years ago I participated with her in a discussion about this down in Los Angeles. It's a group that happens every year called Perspectives. So, Suzanne, thank you very much for being here. We're delighted to hear your opinions on this new infusion. 

Finally, the last, but not least, is Floyd Christofferson, previously ran SummitFX Broadcasting. Floyd is now general manager and vice-president of the news division for Video Networks in Atlanta. Video Networks is a company very much involved in media and asset management, in addition to a lot of live broadcasting and distribution of content. 

So we have a very experienced group of people here that have a lot of opinions. The format is going to be that Gary Schultz is going to come up and provide some questions to the panelists and then after, around 9:30, we'll open it up to the audience. So we would really like to get your ideas as well. 

The neat thing about this is there is no right or wrong answers. We're here to hear opinions and learn together. We're all feeling our way through this infusion, and I think it will be a very interesting day for us. 

What I would like to do at this point is introduce Gary Schultz, who is the president of Multimedia Research Group. Multimedia Research Group is a research company that specializes in video multimedia and Internet related market research, and at this point I would like to bring Gary up to go ahead and address the panel. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Thanks. Thank you, Greg. 

Welcome. We're going to talk about the Internet and the impact on broadcasting and particularly terrestrial broadcasting. We have, as Greg just pointed out, a very diverse and talented group of panelists to talk about it. 

Let me just kind of frame this in a way so that we can get the panelists to give us an initial position, if you will. 

The Internet is viewed in two different ways. If you look at the popular press, some people say it's basically a bubble that's a technological hype job and it's going to burst and go away. That's one position. 

You also hear another kind of a position that the Internet is almost like instead of a bubble, a huge you gelatinous substance that is rolling slowly but surely over all of our businesses, our homes and, in fact, our lives. It is penetrating every aspect of what we do. 

So in a sense, panelists, I'm asking, when you hear the words ".com," does that bring green for greed to your mind or does it bring, perhaps, red for rage and some of the investments that you've lost recently? Why don't we -- I'm asking, really, where do you and your companies find yourselves in terms of how important the Internet is, and then, of course, how important it is to broadcasters. 

So what I would like to do, initially, is to kind of work from A to V in asking each one of you to give us a 30 second overview and, by way of introduction, how important do you and your companies think the Internet is and how important is it to broadcasting? On a scale of 1 to 10, if you will, ten being high, are you three or five or a zero? So let's start with Paul. 

MR. CAMPBELL:
First of all, thank you. Glad to be here. Paul Campbell. I am the VP of the media entertainment group at Akamai Technologies, and my focus is on working with media and entertainment companies to provide the enabling services and products to enable broadcasting on the Internet. So kind of just by the nature of my job, the Internet is very important. It's a 10. If it wasn't, I would be looking for employment elsewhere. 

But at Akamai, we started out, the history of the company, we're fairly recent. The company was found in 1998. And we have ramped up tremendously. We have over 400 customers that are pretty much the Who is Who of the Internet, both dot-coms, as well as traditional businesses who have moved onto the Internet, and our focus is on the delivery of content or media by distributing content to the edges of the network to ensure high performance scalability and reliability. 

We're also focusing in on providing applications services to enable content companies to broadcast or deliver their media more efficiently on the Internet. So in terms of the question, we think we're really just at the beginning of a wave of companies, both traditional broadcasters, as well as new content companies, who are going to become broadcasters. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Thank You, Paul. 

MR. LAPPENBUSCH:
My name is Rich Lappenbusch. I'm the director of strategic planning with the digital media division of Microsoft. 

I believe that the Internet, I totally agree with Paul, is maybe 10 or 20 percent of where it's going to be in the future. It's going to be as ubiquitous as AC power today. There is no question of that. We're told daily by our customers, that that's the way they want to take this, that's what they want to do, and we're working with a wide variety of folks to provide technology enabling platforms, as well as working with partners on services, to deliver those platforms. 

So we believe it's going to be ubiquitous, more so probably than power, because you have wireless and things like that, in a very short amount of time. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Thanks. 

MR. CHOPRA:
I'm from Pinnacle Systems. Pinnacle is actually a long-term company in the video market, and we provide tools in conjunction with broadcasters, storage management for streaming and also for viewing to the air. And because we are a more traditional company than, let's say, Akamai, we have been looking at the impact of the Internet fairly seriously, both within the company and impact on the customers. 

And I would like to make -- I'll start with a quote that I read a few moments ago, I guess towards the tail end of last year. Mr. Andy Grove said that in five years every company will be an Internet company or it won't be a company at all. I think what he meant by that is not every company can start competing with Akamai but they have to start to understand how to deploy the Internet, not just terms of parts and services but also in terms of the internal operations, supply chain management, how to manage the relationship with the customers, how they communicate with the channel and so forth. 

So I think that the impact of Internet is going to be impact pervasive and there is a lot of things we're going to expect Pinnacle to provide solutions to our traditional customers and broadcasters, as well as the new emerging broadcasters, who will only broadcast on the Internet. Solutions and creation of storage, streaming and viewing, and I think that's something you must do. 

You talked about the bubble. And, you know, I don't know that the Internet is a bubble. Perhaps the financial hype around the Internet could be a bubble. So I don't think the Internet is something that's going to disappear tomorrow, in ten years or maybe never. 

MR. CHAO:
My name is Clint Chao, and I'm the vice-president of marketing for SkyStream Networks. We're based in California. We're a video -- a networking equipment company, and what we do is build a new class of networking equipment that we called media routers, and media routers are equipment that allow you to take IP of Internet content and move them into broadcast networks. 

And the reason why we build these products is to help the broadcast market, and that being the local broadcasters, satellite companies and cable companies, basically connect their spectrum up with the existing Internet infrastructure. 

One of the interesting misconceptions about the Internet is that the Internet is actually tied to a specific network. It actually isn't. It's completely indifferent as to what network it goes across, it just happens to have predominantly flowed through copper and fiber networks up to this point. 

Now why would we want to move Internet content over broadcast networks? The reason being is two reasons. One is a broadcast, whether you know it or not, actually has very enviable spectrum because when you broadcast any program over television airwaves or over cable networks, all you have to do is send that content once and everybody gets it and receives it at the same time. 

It's absolutely the most efficient way to deliver information, because you don't have to send individual copies of a piece of content to every single individual user. 

And the other reason why broadcast is very - has a very enviable spectrum is because of the massive footprint that each of the broadcasters possess in reaching a very targeted audience. 

So, for example, a television station based in San Francisco, airs a program, and millions of people throughout the Bay area can receive it just by turning on their receiver devices, TV sets or what have you, and get the information, again, with one single broadcast. 

So we see an opportunity to help bring this broadcast spectrum into the Internet infrastructure so that we can start delivering a new category of Internet content that we're actually not seeing today on the Internet, and that is content that incorporates high quality video. 

And I think what we're seeing on the Internet today is a best attempt at putting video on the Internet but, as you know, if you're from the TV industry, it's still got a ways to go before it reaches TV quality. So what we would like to do is try to give consumers the quality of television programming combined with the interactivity of Internet applications. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Thanks. 

MS. DONINO:
Hello. I'm Suzanne Donino, and I'm with Turner based in Atlanta, and I'm responsible for the eight operational areas that broadcast our 15 entertainment stations and six cable networks. 

I'm really excited about what this new world is going to look like bec3ause it's kind of the owner of one of the largest libraries in the world. We see this as just another extension of being able to repurpose our brands and extend are brands, and certainly with the news of the AOL merger, we, as an organization, are just very excited about opportunities, and we see this as an opportunity. 

We also see it as the opportunity to create new revenue streams. We haven't figured out a lot of what those are yet, but we certainly see that opportunity is out there. 

I put the entertainment -- or the Internet opportunities at a ten. Having just embarked on my 30th year in the broadcast business, I've seen it going from the Wild Wild West to a mainstay business and now we're kind of back to the Wild Wild West. So I think there is no rules. That's probably a good thing in some cases and a bad thing in another. 

One of the major initiatives that -- on the entertainment side is we're looking at, you know, asset management solutions, so we can take our analog content and convert it into a digital format so we can exploit it in much easier ways than we can do it today. 

I think when you look at the success CNN.com, as well as we have just embarked on a fairly significant effort with cartoon networks, so we can create new characters and extend those characters in a way that we haven't been able to do before. So we're really excited about it. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Thanks. Floyd. 

MR. CHRISTOFFERSON:
Floyd Christofferson. I'm with Video Networks and absolutely, of course, there is no question that the Internet is revolutionizing the way all of broadcasting and content industries will operate. I mean, I'm not that old, but I remember as a foreign correspondent being in the field and sending video or sending film back via courier, every night, from Southern Africa. 

They would take it in a pouch, shuttle to the airport, drive it -- fly it back to New York, get on a motorcycle and rush it in to air on the evening news. This is less than 20 years ago. 

It's a revolution, and even on this panel, it's interesting because you can see how you've got content suppliers, such as Turner, who have massive libraries and then the digital spectrum on the other end where these libraries and content can be distributed down to automatically on the end where they can stream it out to -- over the Internet. 

The missing piece is that transport, and this is where I think that the biggest opportunity lies, is how to get this volume content out to these receive points. On the other, fortunately, Pinnacle is kind of in the middle of all of those steps, along with Microsoft, but what BNI does then, and this is where I think that a lot of the potential of the Internet can be realized, is provide a transport for that. 

Right now we distribute servers to broadcast stations throughout the country and are -- for example, with NBC, we are distributing all of NBC's news content over an IP multicast. It's IP and yet goes out and is received by the stations and managed into their production stream. So this is a gateway to connect these two pieces, the content source and the ultimate manipulator of content on the other end. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Thanks, Floyd. 

So it sounds like we've got a bunch of 10s here. So there is no question about where the panel stands in terms of the importance of the Internet. This is a terrestrial broadcast convention, primarily here at NAB. 

So let me just ask a question about what your advice is on the ATSC question. The FCC has mandated employment of ATSC TV, and yet the terrestrial broadcasters are sort of struggling between two different issues: Is it going to be better quality or is it going to be more choice? What do you feel? Do you feel that broadcasters are any closer than they were a year ago in terms of making progress and offering things like datacasting or Internet services? Or are they stuck in a state as they were a year ago? 

So let's start with Ajay, see what your perspective on where the terrestrial broadcasts are. 

MR. CHOPRA:
I think if I can back up from that a little bit, the key assets that broadcasters have is content. That's the number one. The number two is the distribution channels, the access to the spectrum that we just talked about. And number three, in certain instances, for example, CNN is a brand itself. The brand can be extended on the airwaves, to the Internet and perhaps other areas. 

So, in my opinion, those are the three primary assets. So I don't think that there needs to be a compromise between quality, you know, and the breadth of distribution over the Internet. I think that they both can exist simultaneously. I don't believe that the Internet is going to be replace television because the viewing experience is so different. 

You're doing that towards entertainment and receive mode, perhaps in a group, whereas the Internet experience is more personalized one to one and more information rather than entertainment. 

So I think that -- what I believe is happening is that the utilization of the ATSC spectrum is still kind of stalled, frankly, but there are companies that are starting to crystallize that more from the outside for the broadcasters. 

For example, Geocast is working with SkyStream putting together a station that is providing Internet services to allow IP data to be multicast in a broadcast spectrum. 

So I think that's starting to happen, and several terrestrial broadcasters are signing up for those services. I don't know what the long-term prospects would be for that type of thing, but once they start to experience success, using an external catalyst like Geocast, I believe the broadcasts will start to move towards deploying their own services deploying their own content using that mechanism and extend the reach of their original content data to the Internet using that spectrum. But I don't think it's really taken off yet. There's been progress made since last year, I believe, but we're not quite there yet. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Let's go to Rich at MSNBC, or are you still involved in that? 

MR. LAPPENBUSCH:
I'm no longer involved. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
All right. What's your position on where the terrestrial broadcasters are in terms of getting to the next step? 

MR. LAPPENBUSCH:
They've definitely made some progress. There is obviously some engineering discussions happening at the show that lead us to believe there is still a lot of work to do. As part of a company that's been involved in deploying technology world-wide over, you know, in some cases, decades, we understand how tough it is to do that sort of thing. 

And we sympathize and we look at them and say, well, there are tools or technologies that we can enable. We're working with folks so as soon as the standards get crystallized, we can actually support a lot of those things. 

You'll see kind of a -- some of our interim efforts, through working with certain technological factors, wide variety of folks, to deliver these things, and as soon as reasonably possible for the consumers. So we understand how tough it is to do this and how much engineering is required, and we want to support that effort but to be honest, it's not been the progress that I think anyone's expected. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Suzanne, I see you nodding your head down there. I take it you agree. I mean, we've got Microsoft and AOL here, so I'm not quite sure you wouldn't. Go ahead. 

MS. DONINO:
I echo what's been said. I think it's been slow. I think the industry is still - though it is a business, and I think we can't lose sight of the people who are looking for how do I protect my core business and how do I grow this new business. 

We struggle as an organization a lot of times with what we call the cannibalization issue but, again, I think we're seeing new opportunities in how we just continue to create more choice with, you know, what the viewer and the end user wants. 

I, frankly, think they're still trying to figure out what they want. You know, Greg's point about how his world has changed over the past year. I can relate to e-mail and how it changed my world and now I just see that there's this explosion of, you know, what's going to be out there for us to be entertained and informed and educated. 

So I think there's still a lot of answers that we've got to -- or questions that we have to find answers for. I think the technology exceeds what the business models are today. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
Clint, I heard you mention that, Ajay? Is that a viable option at this point, that and other offerings like that, where if I'm a terrestrial broadcaster wanting not to get left out in the cold. 

MR. CHAO:
Yes. I think the terrestrial broadcasters are at a decision point where I think the largest opportunity for them in the next decade is right in front of them. The government is granting them 20 megabytes of digital spectrum to offer programming to their local community or their reach or their footprint of users or viewers. And the opportunity is to use that 20 megabytes in the most efficient manner possible. 

And we were talking about how different it is at the last NAB. A year ago NAB I think the big decision is high definition really going to be the killer app of this particular market? And I think that's completely shifted this year to, okay, I got 20 megabytes of spectrum, what can I do with this 20 megabytes? I can offer my television programs at standard definition rates, let's say at five megabytes, that leaves me 15 megabytes of available bandwidth to reach the millions of people that my current network reaches. 

That's far more than many of the terrestrial -- the copper based networks that are out there and it's, again, very inefficient. So I think there is an opportunity for broadcasters to work with companies like Geocast, who will come to them and say, look, I know you guys, you own and operate a full blown television business. We can help you evolve the business by offering data services. 

Now, on the other hand, I do agree that in Ajay's comment, that once television broadcasters become more Internet savvy, they're going to say, this spectrum is pretty valuable, and we've got a lot of content, we've got a lot of property that we can leverage into these networks, and they may be interested in starting to initiate their own services to mix television based content with Internet based content. 

And, again, I think that's the single largest opportunity for broadcasters, is to data enable their networks so that they can take on some of these new service offerings that are coming at them, and even though it may sound very confusing to television broadcasters, I think if you data enable the network, then everybody's products here on this panel can help make their networks more efficient and offer new services. 

MODERATOR SCHULTZ:
We've coined a new term here, data enable. Thank you very much, Clint. 

Let me go to another big issue that we've heard of recently, Panelists, and this has to do with the impact of the recent iCrave decision on broadcasters, if you could comment. Recently, a Canadian webcaster, iCrave TV, agreed to stop webcasting U.S. and Canadian broadcast signals under the threat of a lawsuit from the MPAA and a bunch of large U.S. broadcasters. 

Now, panel, what impact is this going to have on broadcasters and webcasters future activities? Are they just going to push them back into denial, if you will, or will you have some extra time with the courts on our side? You know, after all, I favor to say we're doing nothing more than what cable networks do or satellite, we're just rebroadcasting signals? Why not? Or is this an opportunity? Should broadcasters, including CNN, MSNBC, if you will, embrace this as an opportunity to grow market share over the Internet? Fight it? Ignore it? What do you think? Rich, let's start with you. 

MR. LAPPENBUSCH:
I absolutely see it as a wake-up call. If you look at the iCrave decision and you see what was going on there, somebody came up with a business model, however flawed or unethical you want to go, that they were trying to take the value of these signals and deliver them to an audience. So if you find that third parties are more effective at taking their brand and getting to the audience, then that should be a wake-up call that the audience is there and they're interested in it. 

One of the reasons iCrave got so much press is the fact their site was widely successful. It was very compelling to have that many networks in one location. And so, obviously, we've got a virtual MSO, if you will. 

There are a lot of interesting implications of that, but I really think the broadcasters should look at that and say -- and also look at what's going on with the music space, et cetera, and say, hey, if I want to protect my brand, if I want to serve my community, which is part of my charter as a party to getting the bandwidths, they don't get it for free, they have a bond to the community, if I want to build that, I really need to reconsider how I'm getting my brand, my content, my products to the audience. 

So I think it's important that everyone consider that and, also, think about the implications in their business plan. 

MR. CHOPR