Cobus Potgieter is on the rise.(Image: Supplied by SMG Africa)MEDIA CONTACTS• Antoinette PantonCobus Potgieter’s media relationsSMG Africa+27 43 726 8833 or +27 83 419 8939Bongani NkosiCobus Potgieter, a self-taught South African drummer, is an authentic international trendsetter who’s capturing the hearts of fans the world over.The 23-year-old East London-based musician has found his niche on the internet, using social networking sites to grow his support base in the global music market. He’s amassed more than 100 000 fans on YouTube, where he’s been uploading videos since August 2006.“I think I’m very blessed,” Potgieter said. “The support I’m getting is incredible.”Self-taughtPotgieter started playing drums in 2002, at the age of 15. He’s taught himself everything he knows about the expressive instrument.It’s sheer hard work that has secured him a place in the hearts of many youthful drum aficionados, he said. In many of the uploaded videos he plays two covers, including John Mayer’s Waiting on the World to Change.“I try to add something unique, to do things that come naturally,” said Potgieter, a devout pastor’s son.Just four years ago he started uploading home-made videos onto YouTube, a platform that has catapulted him into international stardom. He was just playing around with the concept, but the results are surprising him. “It was not a decision that I made as such. I just had the videos, and I thought, why not?”His fans are located in different parts of the world, as his Facebook and other social media accounts show – from Asia to America and Europe. He has more than 72 000 friends on Facebook.The hits he garners on YouTube are enough to make webmasters envious. A video uploaded two months ago, remixing Jay Sean’s Down hit, has had 276 986 views – a remarkable feat by internet standards. To date he’s had more 11-million views in total.Some of his popular uploads include Vanilla Sky’s Umbrella and Face Down by Red Jumpsuit Apparatus.His fans shower him with positive messages daily. One fan from a foreign country wrote as a comment to a Facebook status update: “You are amazing, I can sit att [sic] watch your covers all day long. I just don´t get how you do it?! I will never be tired of your clips ;).”The enthusiastic Potgieter is jetting off to Spain in August to record and co-produce a song with a Spanish producer, he announced. He’ll also record a new YouTube series in full HD in the accomplished producer’s studio.Growing the Potgieter brandPotgieter does not make any money from the internet uploads, he only attracts more fans to his international support base. He released a tutor DVD for aspiring drummers in 2009, which is being distributed from the US.Though he cannot reveal the circulation figures, Potgieter said the DVD is selling well abroad. The sales picked up during the earlier days of release and then took a slump, he said. But they are surging once more. “I’m happy that it’s picking up again.”His success on the internet has earned him sponsorships from international companies. Established brands like Samson, Music Connection and TRX are sponsoring his drums and other audio equipment.He also has signature drum sets named Laus Deo Semper and Soli Deo Gloria, marketed by drum companies UDRUM and Jobeky Drums. This equipment is helping to grow his brand in the UK and North America.His clothing range is also growing, he said, with merchandise including hoodies, t-shirts and his DVD, among others.
The consequences of living bigAs middle-class houses have grown ever larger, two things have happened.First, large houses do take time to maintain. An army of cleaners and other service workers, many of them working for minimal wages, are required to keep the upscale houses in order. In some ways, we have returned to the era of even middle-class households employing low-wage servants, except that today’s servants no longer live with their employers, but are deployed by firms that provide little in the way of wages or benefits.Second, once-public spaces such as municipal pools or recreational centers, where people from diverse backgrounds used to randomly come together, have increasingly become privatized, allowing access only to carefully circumscribed groups. Even spaces that seem public are often exclusively for the use of limited populations. For example, gated communities sometimes use taxpayer funds — money that by definition should fund projects open to the public — to build amenities such as roads, parks or playgrounds that may only be used by residents of the gated community or their guests.Limiting access to amenities has had other consequences as well. An increase in private facilities for the well-off has gone hand-in-hand with a reduction of public facilities available to all, with a reduced quality of life for many.Take swimming pools. Whereas in 1950, only 2,500 U.S. families owned in-ground pools, by 1999 this number had risen to 4 million. At the same time, public municipal pools were often no longer maintained and many were shuttered, leaving low-income people nowhere to swim.Mobility opportunities have been affected, too. For example, 65% of communities built in the 1960s or earlier had public transportation; by 2005, with an increase in multi-car families, this was only 32.5%. A reduction in public transit decreases opportunities for those who do not drive, such as youth, the elderly, or people who cannot afford a car. The better housing crazeThe average single-family home built in the United States in the 1960s or before was less than 1,500 square feet in size. By 2016, the median size of a new, single-family home sold in the United States was 2,422 square feet, almost twice as large. Single-family homes built in the 1980s had a median of six rooms. By 2000, the median number of rooms was seven. What’s more, homes built in the 2000s were more likely than earlier models to have more of all types of spaces: bedrooms, bathrooms, living rooms, family rooms, dining rooms, dens, recreation rooms, utility rooms and, as the number of cars per family increased, garages.Today, homebuilding companies promote these expanding spaces — large yards, spaces for entertainment, private swimming pools, or even home theaters — as needed for recreation and social events. Ten Ways to Improve a New HomeA Better Way to Encourage Efficient New HomesWhat’s the Definition of ‘Green Building’?Houses Are Getting Bigger and Pricier Each home a castle?Living better is not only defined as having more space, but also as having more and newer products. Since at least the 1920s, when the “servant crisis” forced the mistress of the house to take on tasks servants had once performed, marketing efforts have suggested that increasing the range of products and amenities in our home will make housework easier and family life more pleasant. The scale of such products has only increased over time.In the 1920s, advertising suggested that middle-class women who had once had servants to do their more odious housework could now, with the right cleaners, be able to easily do the job themselves.By the 1950s, advertisements touted coordinated kitchens as allowing women to save time on their housework, so they could spend more time with their families. More recently, advertisers have presented the house itself as a product that will improve the family’s social standing while providing ample space for family activities and togetherness for the parent couple, all the while remaining easy to maintain. The implication has been that even if our houses get larger, we won’t need to spend more effort running them.In my research, I note that the housework shown — cooking, doing laundry, helping children with their homework — is presented as an opportunity for social engagement or family bonding.Advertisements never mentioned that more bathrooms also mean more toilets to scrub, or that having a large yard with a pool for the kids and their friends means hours of upkeep. RELATED ARTICLES The United States is facing a housing crisis: Affordable housing is inadequate, while luxury homes abound. Homelessness remains a persistent problem in many areas of the country.Despite this, popular culture has often focused on housing as an opportunity for upward mobility: the American Dream wrapped within four walls and a roof. The housing industry has contributed to this belief as it has promoted ideals of “living better.” Happiness is marketed as living with both more space and more amenities.As an architect and scholar who examines how we shape buildings and how they shape us, I’ve examined the trend toward “more is better” in housing. Opulent housing is promoted as a reward for hard work and diligence, turning housing from a basic necessity into an aspirational product.Yet what are the ethical consequences of such aspirational dreams? Is there a point where “more is better” creates an ethical dilemma? Redefining the paradigm“Living better” through purchasing bigger housing with more lavish amenities thus poses several ethical questions.In living in the United States, how willing should we be to accept a system in which relatively opulent lifestyles are achievable to the middle class only through low-wage labor by others? And how willing should we be to accept a system in which an increase in amenities purchased by the affluent foreshadows a reduction in those amenities for the financially less endowed?Ethically, I believe that the American Dream should not be allowed to devolve into a zero-sum game, in which one person’s gain comes at others’ loss. A solution could lie in redefining the ideal of “living better.” Instead of limiting access to space through its privatization, we could think of publicly accessible spaces and amenities as providing new freedoms though opportunities for engaging with people who are different from us and who might thus stretch our thinking about the world.Redefining the American Dream in this way would open us to new and serendipitous experiences, as we break through the walls that surround us. Alexandra Staub is an associate professor of architecture, affiliate faculty, Rock Ethics Institute, Pennsylvania State University. This post originally appeared at The Conversation.
We think that we will lose the relationship we have with our client or prospect by bringing up the difficult issues that they don’t really want to face. We believe that speaking to or about those issues will somehow cause us to lose their trust, especially when it’s clear that they are dealing with a challenging issue. But nothing could be further from the truth.Fear of Going FirstThe lesser salesperson isn’t brave enough to bring up their client’s deepest, most difficult challenges because they are afraid they will alienate the client by asking them to face their real dragon. To the client who is dealing with the challenge, that salesperson doesn’t look like someone who can help, someone who can make a real difference.Courage and TrustThe person who gains their client’s trust is the person who has the courage to address the issue they are struggling with. The willingness to engage around the difficult issues is what makes that person someone worth doing business with. It demonstrates that you are willing to help them with something you both recognize is going to be difficult. This doesn’t destroy trust—it builds it.You Go FirstYour clients need to be brave. Change is always a step into the unknown. It is difficult to make real change in any organization, even a small team. It means that people have to agree to face their fears, and it means they have to do things differently.You need to be brave in order to help your clients. You have to have the courage to address the issues that might make things more difficult for you by making a deal more complicated to win.You have to be brave enough to commit yourself to helping your client make improvements. You have to have the intestinal fortitude to commit yourself to being accountable for helping your client make the changes and steer them clear to the other side of their challenge. Doing these things will earn you their trust.When it comes to having the courage to deal with the biggest and most challenging problems your clients have, you need to go first. If you are going to ask your client to have courage, you need to first show it yourself.
Mesut Özil Ozil should choose Bundesliga return over Man Utd move, says Riedle Alex Fisher Last updated 2 years ago 21:48 10/10/17 FacebookTwitterRedditcopy Comments(0) Mesut Özil Manchester United Arsenal Premier League Bundesliga Transfers The Arsenal midfielder has been linked with a move to the Old Trafford side, but the former Germany international feels it would be the wrong decision Mesut Ozil should opt for a return to the Bundesliga rather than Manchester United if he decides to leave Arsenal at the end of the season, Karl-Heinz Riedle says.The Germany international has yet to sign a new deal at the Emirates Stadium, with his current contract expiring in June 2018.United have been linked with a move for the playmaker, which would see Ozil reunited with his former Real Madrid boss Jose Mourinho. Editors’ Picks Why Barcelona god Messi will never be worshipped in the same way in Argentina Lyon treble & England heartbreak: The full story behind Lucy Bronze’s dramatic 2019 Liverpool v Man City is now the league’s biggest rivalry and the bitterness is growing Megan Rapinoe: Born & brilliant in the U.S.A. Though Riedle believes a return to Germany would be the best for Ozil, he believes the riches on offer in the Premier League could sway his decision.”Ozil going back to Germany? Who knows,” Riedle told Omnisport. “There’s a rumour that he goes to Manchester United. He shouldn’t do it.“Ozil is a quality player. If you see his skills, it’s just amazing what he can do on the pitch. We would be very happy if he comes back to a club in Germany, for sure. But I’m not his agent so I don’t know where he ends up.”Best option is, from my point, if he would come to the Bundesliga. It’s a really good option because we get another national player back in our league.”But if he is looking only for the money, then it would be very difficult to find the same kind of money in the German league than he can find in the Premier League.”
zoom The Review Panel for the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project has changed the end date of the comment period regarding the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and the Marine Shipping Addendum submitted by Canada’s Vancouver Fraser Port Authority.The deadline to submit comments was changed from October 14, 2016 to October 28, 2016.The panel has provided this additional time to allow participants to modify or augment their submissions in response to additional information received from the proponent on the coastal geomorphic and ecosystem models and other topics.The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority proposes the construction and operation of a new three-berth marine container terminal located at Roberts Bank in Delta, British Columbia.The project would be located next to the existing Deltaport and Westshore Terminals. The environmental assessment includes a consideration of the proposed project and of marine shipping associated with the project.In June, Indigenous groups, government bodies, the public and other interested parties, were invited to submit comments to the Review Panel on the sufficiency and technical merit of the environmental assessment.They were also invited to make recommendations to the panel on additional information that it should receive prior to proceeding to a public hearing for the project.The Review Panel will consider all submissions, including those that have already been sent by participants in relation to the environmental assessment of the project.The Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project is also being assessed under the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Act, and requires other permits and authorizations before it can proceed.Subject to environmental permits and approvals and a final investment decision, construction could begin in 2018 and would take approximately five-and-a-half years to complete.Port Metro Vancouver has shortlisted five candidates out of more than ten companies and consortia which had initially submitted their bids to operate the proposed Roberts Bank Terminal 2.Abu Dhabi Terminals, Grup TCB / Mitsubishi Corp consortium, Ports America, PSA International, and Terminal Link / CMHI consortium were selected to move forward to the Request for Proposals stage.Once chosen, the terminal operator will be in place for a period of up to 40 years and will be responsible for terminal facilities, equipment and ongoing container handling operations.The new container terminal is expected to provide 2.4 million twenty-foot equivalent units of container capacity per year.