Energy stocks haven’t been the best investment over the past several months largely due to falling oil prices. While the S&P 500 is up around 10% on the year, energy stocks within the index are up just 1%. Over the next 12 months, this trend could certainly reverse as crude oil and natural gas prices have already begun to rebound. But why wait until then? The energy industry is still profitable and undervalued, and I think this could be a great time to invest:

Is now a good time to invest in energy stocks that have been punished by low oil prices? Which companies look the most appealing to you?

Former Goldman Sachs Chief Economist Jim O’Neill must really love creating acronyms. A decade after coining the term “BRICs,” O’Neill has been promoting a new bloc of emerging economies: meet the “MISTs.”

In addition to the MIST nations, the N-11 Fund (Next 11) includes Bangladesh, Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Iran—although the fund doesn’t invest in Iran due to economic sanctions. Though much smaller in size and output—MIST total GDP was $3.9 trillion last year compared with BRIC output of $13.5 trillion—the N-11 countries are rapidly growing thanks to an improving credit outlook, a young average population, and a growing export market.

How many acronyms are too many? It’s getting a little out of hand with the BRICs, PIIGS, CIVETS, MIST, etc. I understand how at first glance, people may roll their eyes at what appears to be salesmanship on the part of Jim O’Neill and Goldman Sachs. But putting labels aside, MIST represents a new an important investment theme. Are smaller emerging markets better poised for growth than their larger, more popular counterparts?

Over the years, Google has branched out to serve a number of different functions. What began as a simple search company has expanded into a mobile company, a cloud computing player, and potentially an engineer of self-driving cars. Could it also become a forecasting tool for central bankers?

Does this bode well for Google’s future? Is tracking Google searches a legitimate tool for central bankers to gauge consumer demand?

When a company has its own Wikipedia page dedicated to its advertising history, it must be doing something right. For years under Steve Jobs, Apple's clever and inspiring advertisements really made you wonder how much more convenient your life might be with one of its products.

Fast forward to about a week ago, when Apple used the Olympics to reveal its newest line of commercials. Are the ads funny? Sure. Will they inspire people to buy a MacBook like they have in the past? Unlikely.

Apple's marketing has been the bedrock of its success and popularity for the past 30 years. Yet is the company's marketing and brand power starting to fade post-Steve Jobs? Here's a taste of old vs. new:

As second quarter earnings season gets underway, many of us are closely following the hype surrounding each day’s earnings reports. It’s easy to get swept up by the wave of analysis as pundits use the latest data to make dire predictions for the future. For the sake of our sanity, it’s important to remember what earnings season is and what it is not.

Today, this is a modest move that will deliver only minor returns next to its investment banking and trading divisions. Yet over the long term, it represents a significant shift in direction as Goldman and other banks are forced to adapt to new regulations and ongoing market turmoil. Executives hope to raise $100 billion in loans, up from $12 billion at the end of March.

Is this a good move for Goldman? What does this shift mean for the banking industry as a whole?

Everyone has that one person at the office. It doesn't matter what you're talking about, they will always have something negative to say. Sometimes it's gossip about a coworker. Other times it's criticism disguised as advice. Whether you call him a Negative Nancy, a Debby Downer or an Always-Has-A-Stick-Up-His-Ass Arthur, there's one common effect: this negative energy is contagious, depressing, and highly toxic.

Emotional contagion can destroy a team's energy and productivity, but we all have a bad day once in while. How do you manage and monitor your emotions at the workplace?

When it comes to CEO compensation, I usually don’t make a big fuss about multimillion dollar paychecks. I understand the job comes with a ton of pressure and responsibility. But this is just ridiculous:

On June 2nd, Bill Johnson assumed the position of CEO of Duke Energy. Within 24 hours, he had resigned.

At what point do companies like Duke need to start rewriting their corporate governance guidelines? Would you still invest in a company with such glaring issues?

The dust has settled since Jamie Dimon’s appearance before Congress a few weeks ago, but there’s something that’s been bothering me about the media coverage. It’s the headline of a certain Bloomberg article, entitled: “Wall Street Forgets Its Job Is to Create Jobs.” I could not disagree more. However, I was intrigued by this quote from Representative Gary Ackerman (NY-D):

Fine. I can see his point, even though the objective of hedging is to lock in profits, not create jobs. But should Wall Street’s primary objective be job creation? Absolutely not, and here’s why:

In recent years, companies have outsourced low-level jobs to back offices overseas in an attempt to cut costs. Today, a similar trend is taking place as financial jobs are being relocated to regional offices outside the traditional financial hubs.

Will finance still be NYC’s flagship industry 10, 20, 30 years from now? This flight from NYC could have some lasting implications for major cities and for the industry as a whole: