Me My Own Boss

Inventor Ripped to Shreds, Comes Out On Top

Not LITERALLY ripped to shreds, I don't think children's luggage could do that (hope not, at least).
The U.K rolls out their sensationalist spirit once more in the British equivalent of American Inventor, Dragons' Den. Taken from the website:

"Welcome to the Dragons' Den, where cash hungry entrepreneurs put their products - and egos - on the line in front of five cutthroat business moguls. They're looking for cash that could make their million dollar dreams come true, but will they crash and burn?"

Rob Law ended up being one of the crash and burners. After spending over a decade and nearly $34,000 of his own money, Law was subjected to harsh criticism from the catty panel on the show. His invention, a small luggage-turn-plaything named "trunki" gained popularity from viewers who found his idea worthwhile. I personally don't see how the panel could have been quite so harsh on him; the idea really is pretty good. The case transforms into a wheeled toy for youngsters, especially handy for sitting on in long airport lines. Not sure how well the whole wheeling madly around a busy airport will fly, but a good idea nonetheless.

It brings to question whether these fiery "dragons" really did not believe the product was worth investing in, or whether the cruelty of their judging boils down to thrills and ratings. Either way, these industry giants were just proved wrong by a tiny, brightly colored, horned suitcase. Congratulations, Mr. Law.

Update on Last Years FSB Winners

CNN features the progress of last year's Fortune Small Business' business plan contest winners.

First place. Students from Harvard and U of Chicago put together a moderately successful SAT and PSAT test program, (prepme.com. pretty catchy name). The company's in the profit margins now, and evidence that a relatively simple idea can be turned into a profitable business. They certainly didn't invent test preps, which goes to show that a new take on an idea can be just as valuable as inventing something entirely new.

Two doctors have come up with a new way to gauge brain pressure using fiber optics through the eyes instead of drilling into the skull. Don't ask me how that works, but with $100,000 from the Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse and testing to commence on animals, this idea could change the face of medicine. Definitely says something for constantly challenging the way things are done.

Third place went to a business (bigfootnetworks.com) that sells interface cards designed to speed up online games. The business plan was written while the inventor was a student at U of Texas. Can't imagine what kind of success something like that would have in, say, Korea. True, American geeks <3  WoW but boy do those Koreans love gaming.

http://money.cnn.com/popups/2006/fsb/where_are_they/index.html   

Does Intelligence = Wealth?

    According to Jay Zagorsky's study published in the journal Intelligence, it's not likely.
Not only was there a little-to-insignificant correlation between higher earning and a higher I.Q, but there appears to be an increase in debt and bankruptcy among those with above average intelligence quotients. The finding comes as an interesting surprise in a culture where bespectacled Bill Gates is the supreme beacon of cash, and college = success.
    The study is by no means conclusive, and my main beef with the outcome is the fact that all statistics were formed based on the use of Intelligence Quotient numbers (I.Q). More and more people are realizing that standardized tests fail to capture the true intelligence of many people who harbor smarts other than the bookish variety. Even the founder of the test, frenchman Alfred Binet , protests that the quiz does not adequately and permanently determine a person's intelligence:

"The scale, properly speaking, does not permit the measure of intelligence, because intellectual qualities are not superposable, and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured"

While the I.Q test attempts to fix a number to a thing that we have not yet been able to concretely measure, and may be perhaps the best resource for a study of this kind, it's my suspicion that the I.Q test is outdated and in many cases unfair, as well as a poor reflection of actual intelligence in all people.
Maybe the measure of intelligence is the reason for the lack of correlation, not the actual smarts themselves? I wouldn't doubt it.