text:
Gottstein Trust Opportunity | Knowledge | Innovation
Forest Science Courses
Wood Science Courses
Registration & *Tax Invoice – Understanding Wood Science Course
Fellowships and awards
Gottstein Fellowship
Gottstein Industry Award
Gottstein Forest Industry Scholarships
Gottstein mission identifies business case for high return on plantation investment
By on October 15, 2015 in News
AUSTRALIA'S forest industry should establish a business case for direct government investment in growing trees to establish critical mass in timber resources, based on benefits for the public good.
That's one of the conclusions by Cameron MacDonald, chief operating officer at HVP Plantations, who has returned from a Gottstein fellowship study mission to industry operations in Europe.
Mr MacDonald said Ireland was investing $15,580,000 (about €100m) a year on establishing a private plantation resource based on a business case developed by a respected economist.
"The business case established that the returns to Irish economy would exceed the government's initial investment," Mr MacDonald said.
"The rationale that underpins this investment could be a model for securing government investment in Australia," he said.
"Forest management services funded through compulsory levies or direct government support is critical to develop private growers' knowledge in growing trees and faith in timber markets."
Mr MacDonald said Finland had established a management service network for private growers through a compulsory levy system facilitated by a significant established resource base.
"Ireland has established a similar network by allocating a fixed proportion of government grants for the establishment of plantations to the contractor workforce charged with putting the trees in the ground," he said.
"Resource and market information is critical to private growers; the Irish government has developed site productivity information to ensure planting programs funded by government target suitable sites.
"An NGO in Finland, supported by government contract work, has developed systems skills that are not only utilised locally but have been taken to the world through Finnish-sponsored foreign aid programs.
Mr MacDonald said private landowner support to provide the land base for plantation investment was critical for ensuring a sustainable estate was established.
Growers had a voice in the establishment and/or management of the private resource in both Ireland and Finland, primarily through peak agricultural bodies. This enabled the industry (private, industrial and processing) to present a united voice to government that facilitated establishing a positive policy environment for the industry rather than one where government could sit on the fence and point to industry dissent.
"A closer working relationship with the National Farmers Federation in Australia is a logical starting point for the forest industry in Australia," Mr MacDonald said.
Even though Mr MacDonald says he was aware of the market distortions created by the European Union, and more specifically the Common Agriculture Policy, he "naively latched on to the fact" that Ireland had established 200,000 ha of private plantations as a possible solution to Australia's inability to fund investment in long rotation plantations.
"While I quickly learnt that politically Europe is a totally different proposition relative to Australia, there are still concepts and approaches that we can learn from here," he said.
Mr MacDonald encouraged readers of his report to take an open mind to the contents, and before they denounced some of the ideas as "never working here", they should consider the thought process that has been followed, and more importantly how the needs of a key stakeholder (i.e. the landowner) have been placed front and centre in both expanding the resource base but also building a powerful coalition for the industry more broadly.
In background comments to the report, Mr MacDonald said both Ireland and England entered the 20th century with very little forest cover; <1% and 5% respectively, essentially caused by deforestation to facilitate agricultural expansion.
The lack of timber resources meant that England nearly ran out of domestic timber supplies during World War 1, resulting in programs to re-establish plantations on government land.
Today, the UK Forestry Commission has more than 250,000 ha of commercial plantation in consolidated blocks, 75% of which is conifer species – Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) in the uplands and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) in the lowlands.
There have been various grant schemes to encourage planting on private land over the last 90 years, particularly in the UK where more than 1.3 million ha of woodland has been established in parcels averaging 13 ha, of which 75% are broad-leaved species.
Central to the provision of these grants has been funding from the European Union of up to 70% of the cost of the various schemes, linked to two complementary policy objectives:
• To reduce the over-production of food in the EU by diverting up to 15% of marginal farmland into alternative land use, primarily to grow trees.
• Increasing forest cover in countries that had experienced significant deforestation, such as Ireland and the UK.
With the EU funding has come certain requirements, particularly in terms of environmental constraints. The key requirement is a cap on the area planted under exotic species in a given compartment, which is currently set at 65%.
"The government has been clever in how the payments have been structured (as distinct from a simple tax deduction of 48.5c in the dollar to wealthy investors in MIS schemes in Australia)," Mr MacDonald said.
The measures to protect the government investment and to ensure ongoing investment in plantation forestry include:
• About 40% of the grant is allocated to pay consultants to submit the grant application and to forest management contractors to do the work. This is to avoid landowners seeking to take short-cuts, but also a key element of the business case for government funding is to develop employment opportunities in depressed regional communities.
• Not all the premium is paid up front. A proportion is held in reserve until age four until the performance of the stand is assessed by a registered forestry consultant or the Forestry Service to ensure the stand has met a minimum performance standard.
• The site must pass a strict assessment of the productivity and growth potential to ensure the benefit of the investment is maximised in terms of saleable product.
Perhaps most importantly, Mr MacDonald said, the land was permanently classified for timber production and a condition of the felling licence was that the landowner had to re-establish the next stand at their own expense.
He said grants, premiums and profits from sale of produce were tax free in Ireland and the UK.
"The Irish government is considering putting a cap on the tax-free amount of €125k per annum (about $A39,200) which would be breached if a farmer were to clearfall more than 6 ha in any one yea," Mr MacDonald said.
"In addition to the up-front payments, farmers can apply for additional payments for activities conducted over the lifetime of the plantation."
Note: HVP Plantations owns 160,000 ha of softwood and hardwood plantations in Victoria, selling around 3 million tonnes of log products a year to sawmills and paper mills.
Cameron MacDonald graduated from the University of Melbourne in 1989 with a Bachelor of Forest Science (Hons) and has subsequently gained a post-graduate degree in accounting and a MBA from the Melbourne Business School. He has more than 20 years' experience in the industry in both the plantation and native forest sector covering both operational and finance roles.
2020 Gottstein Annual Funding Appeal welcomes industry support
2020 Course moved to 2021
Book now for next course
Tribute to Glenn Britton
IFA-Gottstein link considered at Melbourne trustees meeting
Gottstein wood science course to run again
Apply for a fellowship
View our Courses
© 2021 Gottstein Trust. All Rights Reserved.


Picturesque Location. Unrivaled Hospitality. World-Class Facilities.
Whether you're an individual rider or part of an equestrian team, the events of the Palm Beach Masters series offer you the opportunity for unrivaled competition in an unforgettable setting.
The Berkshire Bank VIP Club at the Palm Beach Masters Series offers an exquisite two-story venue for watching the classes on either competition arena. Experience culinary delicacies with an ample variety of beverages with thoughtful, attentive service tailored to meet your every need.
The Palm Beach Masters Series invites spectators to take in the excitement of world-class equestrian sport free of charge. Parking and general admission seating in the grandstands are available on a first-come-first-serve basis for the World Cup Qualifier, Nations Cup USA and Deerdge Derby.
This CSI4* competition (one of seven events in the North American Eastern Sub-League) will attract top riders from across the globe as they vie to secure their place in this season's World Cup final.
At the Deeridge Derby, hunter horses and riders compete on the spectacular show grounds built for the highest levels of horse sport.
Deeridge Farms owners Jerry and Peggy Jacobs have a lifelong love of equestrian sport. Their determination to ensure that Longines FEI World CupTM qualifying competition remain in Wellington was the catalyst for the Palm Beach Masters Series. They worked with preeminent course designers to build stunning and challenging show grounds on their 300-acre, picturesque property. With just two rings, the Jacobses pay homage to the natural beauty and raw competition of the sport. The signature event of the series, the Palm Beach Masters, is one of one of only seven North American, east coast qualifiers for the Longines FEI World CupTM.
Every detail of Deeridge Farms was carefully considered to craft a truly remarkable experience for athletes and spectators alike. The Jacobs family worked closely with the foremost course designers in the equestrian competition industry to ensure that the pristine showgrounds provide a fitting challenge to athletes at the highest levels of the sport.
Featuring two masterfully-designed rings, the showgrounds at Deeridge Farms ensure that competitors and their horses are the center of the action at the Palm Beach Masters Series. The pristine grounds offer an unrivaled backdrop to highlight the natural beauty and raw power of elite equestrian competition.
The Longines FEI World CupTM Jumping North American League exists in seven East Coast and seven West Coast locations in the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The 14 events encompassed in the Longines FEI World CupTM Jumping North American League are carefully reviewed and selected to ensure the highest levels of competition and prestige.
The top 14 athletes from the Longines FEI World CupTM Jumping North American League qualify for the next round, the Longines FEI World CupTM Jumping Final. These 14 athletes are comprised of the seven best athletes from the United States East Coast, top three athletes from the United States West Coast, and the two best athletes from both Canada and Mexico.
Overall, more than $2.4 million dollars of United States currency is available in prize money across the 14 events. The CP Palm Beach Masters presented by Suncast® is one of the most prestigious legs of this international horse jumping league. Each year, this series builds on its success and further establishes itself as an outstanding international equestrian jumping competition offered within the United States.
The Palm Beach Masters Series is thrilled to host 2019 Longines FEI Jumping Nations Cup™ USA at Deeridge Farms!
The only qualifier on U.S. soil for the 2019 Longines FEI Jumping Nations Cup™ Final. A celebration of team competition, the FEI Nations Cup is one of equestrian sport's oldest traditions; Deeridge Farms' Nations Cup week will not only host the Senior Nations Cup event, but also Young Rider, Junior, and Children's Nations Cup competitions, respectively. The event will bring together the sport's current and future stars in a unique team format that pits nations against each other, similarly to what is seen in the Olympic Games.
Impressive athletes. Gorgeous setting. An unforgettable experience at the Palm Beach Masters. Relive all the sights from our previous events in our curated gallery.


text:
Cadillac ATS-V Leaks With 450+ Horses and a Manual Gearbox
Cadillac Could Make a Hot Wagon Again
Cadillac Blackwing Models Push Performance Higher
Cadillac Ditching the Blackwing V-8
(Credit: © Cadillac)
Justin Cupler
2016 Cadillac ATS-V (Credit: © Cadillac)
We all knew it was coming, thanks to tons of spy shots and a teaser video, but unfortunately for Cadillac, its surprise was ruined by a early post from Road & Track. In an apparent software glitch, Road & Track mistakenly published the initial images and preliminary details on the hotly anticipated ATS-V before it was supposed to.
The looks of the ATS-V are pretty much par for the course, as it is basically an ATS Coupe with an aggressive body kit, fat wheels, sticky Michelin Pilot Super Sport rubber and heat extractors on the hood. Also available is a track pack that adds in a modified front splitter, side skirts and rear spoiler to tack on a hefty 100 pounds of downforce at 150 mph.
What really matters is what lies under that modified hood. This is where a 3.6-liter, twin-turbo V-6 engine lurks, ready to pounce on das Germans with at least 450 horsepower and 445 pound-feet of torque — the term "at least" indicates that these are simply initial estimates from Caddy. You may recognize that 3.6-liter engine as the same unit powering the CTS Vsport, but this one boasts at least an extra 30 horses and 15 pound-feet of twist. This extra power comes from a pair of titanium-turbine turbos, dual water-to-air intercoolers, and likely some fuel and spark adjustments. To handle the extra power, Caddy also installed a set of Pankl Racing titanium connecting rods.
The engine mates to either a six-speed manual — Ah, the car gods are good today — or a fast-shifting eight-speed auto transmission. The auto transmission gets some added protection by way of an auxiliary cooler mounted just behind the front air intake.
The suspension system is uprated, and it 50-percent stiffer than the standard ATS Coupe, which is already a good handler in its own right.
Unfortunately, the information R&T had was limited, so there are no further details to report. However, just by looking at these numbers, I think it's safe to assume the ATS-V will crest 60 mph in around four seconds and top out in excess of 160 mph, giving the M4 a run for its money.
We'll bring you the full details as soon as Cadillac reveals them.
Related Topics:Cadillac

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Conceptually: *Why* does the Yield Curve invert?
My questions are: Why does the yield curve invert? If short term rates are higher than long-term rates, wouldn't you want to "lock in" the HIGHER rates that are available with less duration?
* Is this a play for Capital Gains, due to the price changes of longer duration bonds when interest rates drop?
* On a related note: Is the concern [of an investor] that the shorter-duration bonds, when they mature, can only [theoretically] be invested in lower-yielding instruments; and thus, a longer-duration bond locks in a higher yield for a longer period of time?
I [claim to] know the basics of yield curve inversion. Below is a pretty succinct summary.
A: The yield curve inverts when bond investors expect short-term interest rates to fall. They are willing to hold long-term bonds, despite the lower current yield, because they are locking in the yield.
What I do not understand is: Basically what I asked above. Why not take the higher rates that are available on the shorter-term part of the yield curve?
Re: Conceptually: *Why* does the Yield Curve invert?
Some will argue that inverted yields is a leading indicator of a recession. Investors that have little faith in short term economic conditions will actually give up yield to keep their money safe for a longer period of time. As more investors demand long-term notes, those notes can be at a lower yield than the short-term notes (and become inverted).
Typically, it would make more sense to take the shorter duration with a higher yield, but during a recession the investor would buy a longer term note with safety being a higher priority than yield.
This is an example of a possible outcome with a 10 year bond @ 2%, while a 1 year bond is @ 3%.
You've got this backwards. Long term debt typically has higher yields commensurate with higher risk and short term debt has lower yields because it carries less risk. The worry when long term yields start to match short term yields is that the market is overbought and investors are trying to squeeze yield out of rocks.
There are various ways to interpret and decompose the yield curve, but all the above responses including the original post are missing a key component: the term risk premium (or something else similar encompassing risk and other factors beyond expectations of future rates).
If all investors were risk agnostic and there were no preferences on maturity, you would expect a similar return over a certain period whether you're investing in the short, intermediate, or long rates. If short-term rates are less than long-term rates, that means everybody expects on average for short-term rates to increase, equalizing the returns. If short is greater than long, then everybody expects a decrease, likewise evening out returns. Rates across this yield curve reflect expectations of future rates. These represent the risk-neutral rates.
The real world deviates from risk-neutral rates based on additional considerations relating to inflation expectations (that is, including risk of unexpected inflation), uncertainty about future rates and the pricing of that unknown component, liquidity, investor demand at certain maturities relative to outstanding issuance, perceptions of safety and relationships with other assets, etc. These considerations and their pricing are the reason why the expectations hypothesis for interest rates has empirically been very wrong.
An inverted yield curve could thus also arise from a negative term premium, excess demand for longer bonds relative to the short end, even if shorter rates are not expected to decrease in the average future scenario. More likely it comes from expectations that future rates will fall, or some combination of factors, but my point is that's it's not necessarily just about expectations about future rates.
Now, the issue is that these components are not explicitly observable. Some estimates do have a negative term premium [edit: I mean, right now, talking about today's yield curve], though, meaning that it expects higher returns on average from short rates (even though the short rates are lower and the yield curve is upwards sloping, it's perhaps not enough to make up for increasing short rates, so for example investing in cash/T-bills for 5 years may have higher returns than holding a 5-year Treasury for 5 years, even though the 5-year is currently yielding more).
Last edited by lack_ey on Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:09 pm, edited 3 times in total.
That's the value of perfect information. Are they certain. No guessing allowed.
No. At least not really for the US yield curve or other developed markets with low market-perceived risk of default. Check CDS rates and flows, investor sentiment and opinions, etc. during these times.
But more generally, sure, that can be another reason.
To be clear you're saying that the market is concerned about US default risk every time the yield curve inverts? I would suggest that observing A => B doesn't imply B always being caused by A.
I ignore this phenomenon and "stay the course."
My guess is that the Fed always tries to engineer a "soft landing". It drives up the short rates. The yield curve inverts partly because investors like myself are balancing a stock portfolio with intermediate term bonds. That balance is a hedge against a possible recession which is pretty well correlated with an inverted yield curve. The intermediate bonds generally do better then short Treasuries when recessions show up. This graph shows 3 recessions preceded by yield curve inversion. Note this is clearly not the only variable but is it coincidence that recessions followed some months later? Yield curve inversion preceded the 1930 depression.
Last edited by BlueEars on Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Doesn't the curve invert when cost to borrow in the short term is more expensive than in the long-term. In other words, the money supply is tight and borrowing in the near term (short duration bonds) comes with a higher interest rate.
Thank you for the responses, all. The different answers/perspectives are helpful.
lack_ey: Special thanks for bringing up the term premium.
This graph shows 3 recessions preceded by yield curve inversion. Note this is clearly not the only variable but is it coincidence that recessions followed some months later? Yield curve inversion preceded the 1930 depression.
in this case the Prime compared to 20+ year low investment grade corp bonds.
FFR presently is not spiking but rising gradually but could start the same effect.
When the Fed embarks on a rate raising campaign, it is not aberrational for the yield curve to flatten. The Fed raising rates exerts substantial upward pressure on short rates (note the 100-120 bp rise in Vanguard MMF yields). Rising short rates taps the brakes on the economy, which exerts downward pressure on the trajectory of future inflation rates, exerting downward pressure on medium and long rates. Of course the Fed is raising rates because the economy is believed to be healthy and growing, which can increase inflation. So there is a tug of war between these two opposing forces on inflation, and future medium and long rates have a fair correlation to future inflation.
When Alan Greenspan started raising rates after recovery from the dotcom meltdown and 9/11, I think in June 2004, the yield curve also flattened during the process.
Last edited by Northern Flicker on Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:18 pm, edited 13 times in total.
well i did put a "?" after my "default risk" comment.
agree with lackey that default risk is perhaps less applicable to US and other major developed economies.
"Assessing the Risk of Yield Curve Inversion"
One answer could be that the Fed primarily controls short term rates while other market forces tend to drive long term rates. The fed pushing up short term rates causes some fear of economic softening which tends to favor long term bonds vs stocks. This is just a variant on what some others have said here.
On CNBC I heard that the shedding of the balance sheet will cause treasuries to yield more, thus preventing inversion. They use colorful graphics and talk loudly, and I don't see that kind of quality here, so they must be right.
They use colorful graphics and talk loudly, and I don't see that kind of quality here, so they must be right.
I appreciate the continued dialogue above ^^^.
1. As credit/financial conditions "tighten" - such as, when short term interest rates rise and come closer to longer term rates (curve flattening) - banks have less of an incentive to lend and extend credit, including rolling over [renewing] debt. This means struggling firms that rely on credit to survive will go bankrupt and start causing economic distress. --> Makes sense that the Fed wants to avoid a yield curve inversion/severe curve flattening, even if much of that is an effect of Monetary Policy in other parts of the world and not [necessarily] a reflection on the US economy.
2. Financial conditions are pretty loose right now even with a flat-ish yield curve, since the amount that banks pay depositors ("deposit beta") is still very low. Meaning: Banks still earn a spread on their 0% short term borrowing [from depositors] and longer term lending.
3. The Fed/Fed Funds Rate controls - per the guest, Alessio de Longis - the 3 month treasury. He believes market forces have driven up the yields at the 2-year range. My inference is that: the bond market expects more rate hikes in the near term, but after that (post ~3-5 years): Not much else. This gets into the Low Term premium brought up by lack_ey [per my understanding]: without higher inflation, and/or GDP expectations, investors are willing to lock in rates of return at the long end without much [additional] compensation.
Methinks investors are "forced" to take longer term rates, as unexciting as they are, in the attempt to keep their allocation to bonds large enough.
It is the same reason why high-yield market is so crowded.
Also, you can't "lock-in" shorter term rates; it is the definition of "short term".
It's because the market expects future short-term rates to go down. That's the short story. If you ignore credit risk and talk about the treasury yield curve, you can guess that most strategies are about as attractive as any other.
In typical market conditions, short-term rates are expected to stay the same, and the term premium for long-term bonds represents the option value of having short-term investments - if another opportunity comes up or if market conditions change, it's far better to have short-term investments, so the short-term bonds represent significantly more option-value.
If the market expects short-term rates to go up in the future, it makes long-term bonds relatively less attractive, which means a higher yield is necessary to clear the market, which increases the spread. On the flip-side, if the market expects short-term rates to go down in the future, it makes long-term bonds relatively more attractive, which means buys drive down the yield of long-term bonds, driving the spread down.
Another way to think of this is as if short term and long term bonds are two different asset classes almost.
Short term bonds are good if you are investing for short term obligations or betting on inflation.
Long term bonds are for longer term goals and hedges against deflation.
So when people are concerned about deflation, buy long term bonds.
If you are concerned about inflation, buy short term bonds (or TIPS of course).
So naturally one will become more valuable than the other based on investor aggregate concerns.
And yields are an expression of price, inverse of price.
So this is like asking why one has a higher price than the other. Because people bid one or the other higher.
The OP linked to Greg Mankiw's explanation of the inverted yield curve, but apparently didn't follow the explanation Mankiw gave. Here is my way of expressing Mankiw's explanation, which seemed succinct and correct to me.
The yield curve inverts when investors expect short-term interest rates to decline. At that point they are willing to hold long-term bonds, despite the lower current yield, because they are locking in that current long yield, which they expect to decline in the near future. Keep in mind that prevailing long rates reflect both present short rates and also expected future short rates. When investors are expecting short rates to fall markedly in the near future, long rates will be below current short rates.
Short rates are set by the Federal Reserve. So when the yield curve is inverted, investors are probably expecting the Fed to be loosening monetary policy (by lowering short-term interest rates) in the near future. Investors expect the Fed to be loosening because investors believe that economic growth is slowing.They then expect the Fed would react to an expected economic slowdown, or possible oncoming recession, with looser monetary policy in the near future in order to stimulate overall demand. That perception of an upcoming economic slowdown leads to an inverted yield curve today. That's why a negative sloped yield curve is considered an indicator of a possible recession on the horizon.
To answer one of the OP's concerns, you can't lock in a short-term rate. If you can lock-in a rate over time, it's not a short-term rate.
If short term rates are higher than long-term rates, wouldn't you want to "lock in" the HIGHER rates that are available with less duration?
Like Greg Mankiw, Paul Krugman is also a good expositor of basic economics. Here's Krugman's very Mankiw like explanation of the negative yield curve and what it portends.
The reason for the historical relationship between the slope of the yield curve and the economy's performance is that the long-term rate is, in effect, a prediction of future short-term rates. If investors expect the economy to contract, they also expect the Fed to cut [short-term] rates, which tends to make the yield curve negatively sloped. If they expect the economy to expand, they expect the Fed to raise rates, making the yield curve positively sloped.
So I noticed today that the 10 year bond yield is only one tenth of one percent lower than that of the 30 year bond.
Would this mean that the yield curve may go flat or invert?
Does this meant that the common wisdom that interest rates are on the rise and bonds are not a good investment now is wrong?
The term premium from 5 to 30 has been hovering below 1bp per year - virtually flat.
One key concept I was missing when I started this thread: What a Bond (series of payments) really is.
If the investor is worried about yields falling (economic softness, or whatever): You can "lock in" a longer stream of payments by buying a longer duration bond at a yield that is similar or even lower than what a shorter-duration bond would offer. Say you had the choice of a 2-year bond yielding 3% and a 10-year bond yielding 2.9%. You will earn a higher return for years 1-2 with the 2-year bond, but then: That's it. You have to reinvest your principal (bond maturing) at a lower yield, whatever that may be. But with the 10-year bond: No reinvestment risk, you keep that 2.9% stream of payments for as long as the bond lasts.


What sets Decibels 180 apart?
Decibels 180 is owned by private practice owners just like you. Our consultants are industry leaders and successful private practice owners who will guide you toward success. Our courses really work and provide proven results. Check out our testimonials and see what our clients are saying!
Who is Decibels 180 for?
Decibels 180 is for private practice owners who want to grow their businesses.
Each course is customized specifically for you and your practice, and is presented remotely via live conference calls between you and your Decibels 180 consultant. Our consultants are industry leaders and successful private practice owners who will guide you toward success. Virtual hugs and the promise of everlasting Facebook friendship is also included.
Once you've started, you have 30 days to complete each course.
Each course is $3000 ($100 a day for 30 days). If you have manufacturer co-op dollars or business development dollars, this is a great use for those funds! The increase in revenue from successfully completing a course will pay for the module itself, and then some! Also, did we mention the everlasting Facebook friendship?
Are all of your courses remote? What if I need on-site consulting?
All of our courses are remote, but some have on-site options for an additional cost. Contact us for more details.
To get started, choose which course you are interested in and simply fill out the contact us form.


text:
https://www.thehour.com/nation/article/Ex-NY-Gov-Spitzer-offers-life-advice-in-new-book-8186206.php
Ex-NY Gov. Spitzer offers life advice in new book
VERENA DOBNIK
Published 6:02 pm EDT, Sunday, July 14, 2013
NEW YORK -- Former Gov. Eliot Spitzer is offering life advice in a new book released as he campaigns for city comptroller, writing that "self-importance" can lead to a "dangerous arrogance" that often ends badly.
The e-book, "Protecting Capitalism Case by Case," was published this week and is selling online for $9.99. A 198-page paperback version is also available.
Spitzer, who resigned as governor in 2008 amid a prostitution scandal, surprised many by entering the race for New York City comptroller on July 7. His new book focuses on how he went after law-breaking Wall Street titans as a state attorney general dubbed the "Sheriff of Wall Street."
"I'm beginning to think my political career has had an unusual arch to it, but every day has been fascinating," Spitzer told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Saturday.
One chapter in the book offers his 10 "Rules of Life," starting with No. 1: "Loyalty and fiduciary duty matter."
But it doesn't delve into the scandal that drove him from office and turned him into a late-night punch line.
"The only question now is moving forward," Spitzer said.
This week, he's been appearing on various national television shows as a serious candidate -- including a morning talk-show interview during which he broke down when asked whether the excruciating spotlight on his private life had changed him.
He had just days to collect more than 3,700 signatures to be on the Democratic primary ballot with his main opponent, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, but Spitzer delivered 27,000 signatures late Thursday before the midnight deadline.
His wife, Silda, helped collect the signatures. But when asked Saturday whether she would appear with him as he campaigns, the candidate hesitated, saying, "I'm ... I'm sure ... I'm sure so."
Does he have a chance at winning? "I certainly feel that I've got a decent shot at it," he said.
Spitzer said he began writing the book six or seven months ago to present the issues he would have worked on as governor but had to abandon when he resigned after admitting he was a regular client of an escort agency.
He boils down his philosophy on Wall Street transgressions to the view that "companies, when competing, will not properly observe the rules of ethics as we want them to all the time; we need vigorous enforcement."
Spitzer got no advance for the book, he said, and any proceeds from sales will go to charity.