Snyder makes several arguments as to why he put the program under fire – and from the earliest periods of his campaign he’s made no secret about his intentions. Snyder has often claimed that incentive programs cause the state to play favorites, and it has been his position that the government shouldn’t be in the business of picking “winners and losers.”

Except by pulling the rug out from under a developing industry, the governor has done exactly that.

Already, Michigan workers are feeling the hurt. Several films that had been slated to be produced in Michigan, including Marvel Entertainment‘s upcoming big-budget blockbuster “The Avengers” have cancelled their shooting appointments in the state, which has in turn shut down all the necessary support staff and ancillary workers that would have had work as a result. With one announcement, Governor Snyder has cost about 1,000 people their jobs.

Since April 2008, Michigan has been offering media creators up to 42% back on their Michigan-based expenditures, on the basis that the money spent would circulate through and help revitalize Michigan’s struggling economy, as well as create fantastic PR for the beleaguered manufacturing state. On Monday, a new Ernst & Young study was released which found that every dollar spent in these tax breaks in the state lead to $6 in economic activity.

About $163 million in incentives were approved for 2010 alone. Considering that the money isn’t paid out until the completion of the project, meaning that Michigan pays nothing up front, that 600% return should be looking pretty good.

Of course, Snyder and his advisors aren’t looking at it that way – critics of the program claim that the incentives cost the state more than the revenue they bring in. Perhaps in a black and white, 1-to-1 ratio of income to expenditure, that may be the case. Michigan’s program is the most generous in the world. However, without taking into account the circulation of the money that’s paid out, and the taxes paid on each transaction that money makes, it’s not the whole picture.

In 2010, the media incentives were responsible in large part for creating 3,860 full time jobs for Michigan residents.

“The caterers, the florists, the furniture providers, event companies, tent companies that were only seasonal, all of a sudden they’re hiring people,” Ken Droz, consultant for Michigan-based Maxsar Studios and formerly of the Michigan Film Office told The Detroit News. “It’s an industry that has tentacles all over the place that you don’t necessarily see, especially on a spreadsheet.”

The study was reportedly presented to Snyder before his budget presentation, but clearly its findings were considered inconsequential. Opponents of the program and the study, like Mackinac Center for Public Policy, claim that the system is altogether flawed.

“We think (Snyder) should go further and eliminate the program wholesale,” said Michael LaFaive, the Mackinac Center’s director of fiscal policy. “Every dollar used to incentify film production is one dollar deprived to entrepreneurs and other people across the state for their own use.”

This however, begs the question. Other people like whom? Like Philippe Martinez, founder and CEO of Maxsar? How about Brad Wardell at Stardock? Maybe the several investors behind Hangar 42 in Grand Rapids? Or Sean Hurwitz at PixoFactor Entertainment in Royal Oak? They’re all entrepreneurs – but of course, that’s just one industry. Mr. Snyder has said nothing about Michigan’s incentives for venture capital and angel investment, which benefits the investment groups Avalon Investments and Ardesta LLC, both of which he founded. I’m sure we’ll hear something about this sooner or later, since the governor is so very interested in creating a “level playing field” and not letting the state pick “winners and losers.”

Here’s the bottom line. Rick Snyder knows business – he would not be the successful guy he is today if he didn’t. But breaking the back of a new and booming industry in a state that sorely needs one or three, is not the way to economic recovery. Any Michigan citizen is well aware of the budget woes facing the state, and the governor is required by law to balance the budget. Certainly Snyder has some tough decisions to make in the coming months, and I for one, appreciate that he has the stones to make them. But this at least, is a move in the wrong direction, and will hurt far more than it will help.

I’m joining my colleagues in the creative media industry in urging Governor Snyder to rethink his plans regarding the incentive program. We’re all aware that it needs tweaking and can use some adjustments, but to cripple the program means crippling an industry sector in its growth stages – and in a state that is itself crippled by unemployment and a deserting population, it’s not something that we can amiably ignore.

More information and ways to take action can be found at www.rickswrong.com.

Update – July 12: According to The Detroit News, Governor Snyder has officially capped the program at $25 million across the board, starting in the upcoming fiscal year beginning this October. Moreover, a project can now be offered lower than the originally promised 42% with no floor mentioned. It will be interesting to see if the state offers anybody anything other than the generally solid percentages offered by other state programs elsewhere. This, the day after Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal signs a bill that enhances his own state’s programs, is a clear demonstration that the State of Michigan will only work with the automotive industry.

Maybe we can arrange for them to have a chat at the next Republican Governors Association meeting or something.

As part of the analysis of The Jungle’s first $10 billion quarter, the latest earnings statement notes that “Kindle books have now overtaken paperback books as the most popular format on Amazon.com.”

I’m not going to tell anybody to hurl their stock certificates in Random House into the creek, screaming epithets to the sky. Book publishing is by no means going away. But as always, times they are a-changin’. Books are one of the last mediums to democratize. Frankly, it’s about freakin’ time.

TV and movies have been independent for pretty much forever, though certainly websites like YouTube and Vimeo have helped distribute folks’ video creations to the masses, and the plummeting price of increasingly powerful cameras and editing suites help to make those endeavors ever easier. Music has been set free thanks to the Internet as well, and I’m not talking Napster. Any aspiring band can set up a website and make their music available for the cost of a single CD, which anybody can burn at their desk, now. Game developers can distribute their work on the web as well. Journalists can build a blog, develop a media empire of sorts if they like. Just ask Nick Denton or Julian Assange about that one.

So why not books? Why NOT books? Up until devices like the Kindle, Nook or iPad came around, the only method for publishing a book were the traditional routes or via vanity presses that generally cost more to produce than they made for the vast majority of authors.

But with digital books, the several barriers to entry go away. Concerns and scare resources like shelf space and manufacturing costs are gone, and ultimately the biggest concern is quality. The best books can rise to the top, regardless of who they come from. And the idea of the rare book can fall by the wayside as well, since anybody can get a copy of a desired book whenever they want.

Now this doesn’t mean that printed books have to go away. There’ll always be room for printed works, either for wildly popular works and seminal classics, or important books that need to be spread as far and as wide as they can. And in areas that don’t have an infrastructure that can support electronic books, they’ll be even more important.

But e-books have the power to revolutionize, and more importantly, democratize their given medium. Finally books can catch up to their other counterparts in media, and now, nearly 600 years after Gutenberg’s debut of his own printing press is book authorship really open to everybody. Any book can be available to anyone, anytime, anywhere. It’s a change we’d do well to embrace.

So the good folks at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers have really been on a roll over the last few years, throwing down some serious cash on technology bets which, it seems, have come up big. Two years ago, they kicked off the $100 million iFund, focused solely on businesses developing products for the iPhone, iPod and iPad. This March, they doubled that amount. Now today, Kleiner Perkins got together with Amazon, Facebook and Zynga to announce the new sFund, $250 million focused on social applications.

It’s interesting to note that Google and Yahoo! were not present for this gathering, whatsoever. According to KPCB partner John Doerr, Facebook is the social platform to focus on. “Facebook is it,” he said.

This isn’t saying that Kleiner Perkins is a kingmaker or anything, I’m not saying we’ll be seeing Facebook eclipse Google anytime soon. But it’s been pretty clear over the latter portion of the decade that KPCB seems to know how to pick winners. Other companies that WERE present and are partners in the fund included Comcast, Liberty Media and Allen & Company, LLC.

The fund has already invested in one company, Cafébots, who announced a $5 million round this morning – it’s not precisely clear what they do, but they claim to be working on a product involved in “Friend Relationship Management.” That sounds pretty social. They expect to have a product ready by the end of the year.

The thing about “social” is that is kind of a nebulous term. Obviously, it means involving other people, but just about anything can involve other people.

Could it be that this is just another tech bubble, like the dot-com bubble of years past? Kleiner Perks put down $250 million saying it isn’t. What do you think? Are you out to grab a piece of that for yourself?

There’s a great article written by Mark Crump for The Apple Blog regarding using the newly announced iPad for business uses, that echo what I’ve often told people since the official announcement of the device. As somebody who uses Macs for daily work, business use on the iPad was indeed at the forefront of my considerations for such a tool. Certainly, there is more to it than just being able to run the iWork suite on it, though it is definitely a boon.

A lot of folks have been disheartened by the iPad, calling it little more than an oversized iPod Touch. And sure, it’s fair to make that comparison. Both devices use iPhone OS, and both devices share a large amount of functionality, as well as expansion protocols wrought by Apple’s proprietary Application Store.However, it’s important to remember that iPhone OS is still simply an embedded version of OS X, and as such it can handle a lot of what developers throw at it. Obviously nobody is going to be running Xcode or Maya on an iPad anytime soon, but for the traveling professional, this device may just be what we’re looking for.

It’s extremely portable – far more so than a comparatively bulky Macbook Pro, and decidedly lighter to boot. That makes it ideal for any kind of commute, or airline travel. It’s a very sexy piece of equipment for the folks who need to give presentations and conduct meetings, and since it’ll connect to most projectors, the effective usage of the device won’t be reduced.

And for folks who subscribe to the GTD model of productivity, it’s a great reminder to work lightly while on the go. Let’s face it, if you’re on the go, what are you REALLY going to work on? The iPad is great for email, keeping up on articles, a bit of word processing, Keynote-ing and spreadsheets. For most people, a Macbook Pro or other comparable laptop is just over the top, and creates distractions.

Anyway, take a look at the article for the more verbose read, but come on back here and let me know what you think in the comments!

Even now as the console approaches its second birthday, supplies for the units are scare and hard to come by. Nintendo of America CEO and President Reggie Fils-Aime has stated that during this holiday season, Wii consoles will likely still be somewhat rare. In other words, if you see one grab one, because you’ll be out of luck later. Though this leads to speculation that Nintendo is creating a demand for the system by creating an artificial scarcity – after all, how is it that two years after launch a multinational, profitable corporation cannot get their manufacturing lines up to speed – the fact remains that the company has struck digital gold with their latest device.

But technology continues to progress, our thoughts – and Nintendo’s R&D directives – will inevitably turn to what’s next. In an interview with the UK’s Channel 4, Shigeru Miyamoto – Senior Managing Director of Nintendo Co. Ltd., the Japanese parent company – made clear that Nintendo’s mission is to “improve and to take advantage of cheap technology to create reasonable and affordable entertainment.” Indeed, the Wii is a step in this direction, with Nintendo execs refusing to even attempt to compete with market contemporaries Sony and Microsoft on any level of technological supremacy. The Wii is a console that is made purposefully weaker, but on the other hand is comparatively inexpensive to manufacture. Indeed, Nintendo is the only company in the industry that actually makes money on their game systems, instead of treating them as a loss leader.

So what does this mean for the future of the Wii, and indeed, the game industry? As one of its biggest players attempts to create a new dialogue focusing on unique input methodology and design specifications, we face a potential deeper splitting of the market, deeper than we have seen in this generation as Nintendo expands on the concepts they’ve introduced.

For one thing, cheaper hardware can mean more frequent iterations. According to former 1UP.com editorial director John Davison, it’s possible we’ll see a new Wii by 2011. R&D spending at Nintendo has tripled since the Wii’s launch in 2006, and it is wholly plausible that the next-generation is already around the corner. It stands to reason that a number of the improvements that are appearing on the Wii will be present in the next version, namely its 1:1 motion tracking technology MotionPlus, and with any luck Nintendo will learn from its mistakes and provide improved storage and Internet solutions as well. Technology that is cheap now, will only be cheaper in the next go-round, and at that point we should also expect to see things like HD output and RF connectivity, instead of the Bluetooth that is in place now. Indeed, recent announcements from Nintendo have noted that their production costs have been cut by half since the Wii’s launch.

Past this point, as developers get used to the idea of developing with the unique input system that the Wii and its inevitable progeny will feature, different modes and methods of gameplay will certainly result.

What remains to be seen is whether the company will learn from its mistakes in this recent generation of hardware when it comes to its online presence, which is, in a word, terrible. Though it has been demonstrated that it is not the system with the best online capability is the one that achieves market dominance, it will certainly be a welcome addition to a machine that will surely be looked at closely, as the next round of technology dawns.

Apparently he applied for a trademark on the company name BGC3 and the C3 logo back in September.

It’s not entirely clear what the aims of the new company are, though the trademark application indicates “think tank services.” So what is Bill and his new crew going to be thinking about? It’s not meant to be a commercial venture, according to Bishop’s sources. What it will do, is coordinate Gates’ philanthropic and business ventures. It will also lend structure to Gates’ personal pursuit of new technology discoveries.

This isn’t the first time Gates has started a company to address his myriad needs and interests. His Cascade Investments, LLC exists to handle his stock and financial holdings, while Watermark Estate Management Services manges his personal and family matters.

But on this company, despite his presence in the name – the BG is obvious, the C stands for “catalyst – his name isn’t mentioned in any company-related public documents. That’s how this slipped by the press for so long.

So what’s Bill Gates up to?

He’s got history backing programs on alternative nuclear power, and has interests as disparate as biotechnology and economics, on top of the computers he’s caused us to know and love so well.

So it seems like Redmond’s favorite citizen is up to something again, but as of yet it’s still pretty mysterious. He turns 53 next week. Seems like a pretty good way to kick off a guy’s retirement years.

Amidst a sea of IP vultures, Web 2.0 success stories, buzzwords and new market capitalizations, are a handful of individuals whom I respect (sometimes grudgingly!) and whose examples we could stand to learn something from.

I’ve long been of the opinion that business school is in large part for suckers. A university is in every way a business, and I’d be willing to bet that part of the lesson you learn in earning a business degree is that you just gave a company a large sum of money for something that is, in effect, largely ethereal. I’m a big proponent of learning by doing, though a little independent study doesn’t hurt either.

Anyway, the other day I was thinking that I’d like to learn a little bit more about some of these folks. (But not too much, because if I’m gonna copy somebody I may as well work for them.)

And then BusinessWeek does a big ol’ story on Microsoft’s J Allard.

They do the whole song and dance about how he’s a firebrand, a guy who does his thinking outside the box and is one of the key torch carriers that will reshape, revitalize and reinvigorate Microsoft in the wake of Bill Gates’ departure for the coming decades. They talk about how extreme he is, with his mountain biking and his fast cars, his lust for speed and his disdain for gravity.

“‘I love that gravity is unforgiving,’ he says. He even blazes through e-mail, jotting down notes all in lower case: ‘shift key slows you down,’ he writes.”

Hey, that’s great. So he’s a “corporate suit” who is also “hip” and “edgy.” Why should I care what he does? The Xbox took several years to really show fruition, and it’s only this generation that Microsoft is really seeing the fruits of that gamble. The Zune, Allard’s new project, will likely require a few iterations before it too sees any real success. I think it will, eventually. Like the early Xbox, the Zune is great in concept but poor in execution.

But that’s neither here nor there.

What gets me excited about reading about a fellow who reinvented his self-image in the same way he worked to reinvent his employer, is the “Fuck it, just go and do” attitude he seems to take to the projects he’s undertaken since the guy’s been on my radar.

Reading his biography, people balked when he came on board at Microsoft, and told everyone that the Internet was the future, and that they needed to be on board. Eventually Microsoft got with the program, but can you imagine what things might be like if they’d gotten in the ‘net game say, five years earlier? Or the Xbox – many members of the Microsoft brass thought a dedicated games machine, especially one made in-house would be ridiculous, and the fact that Allard didn’t want it to run Windows? Ludicrous!

(Of course, the Xbox wouldn’t be where it is without Seamus Blackley, but what’s he doing now? Most recent, I see a credit on MobyGames for Psychonauts on the publisher end. Hmm.)

That’s what I like. Coming up with an idea, focusing on a vision, and then drilling into it and ignoring what other people say. Detractors, naysayers. There is, of course, room for adjustment and refinement in your trajectory, but I think it’s boneheaded and counterproductive to run things through a large committee of approvals and analyses. When you are creating something new, you can’t always apply conventional wisdom to it because while that worked for the old ways and old systems of design and management, that only got you the results of old.

I love reading stories like this. This is the kind of education that new entrepreneurs need. Younger guys who give the finger to conventional business tactics and just go straight for the throat.

‘Course, that’s easy to do when you have the backing of a multibillion global corporation behind you. But it’s something to shoot for.