The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
2536
The Global Intelligence Files

### Index pages

List of Releases

### by Date of Document

unspecified
2001
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011

### by Date of Release

2001-03-13
2010-03-10
2011-03-05
2011-03-15
2012-01-29
2012-02-27
2012-02-28
2012-02-29
2012-03-01
2012-03-02
2012-03-03
2012-03-04
2012-03-05
2012-03-06
2012-03-07
2012-03-08
2012-03-09
2012-03-10
2012-03-11
2012-03-12
2012-03-13
2012-03-14
2012-03-15
2012-03-16
2012-03-17
2012-03-19
2012-03-20
2012-03-23
2012-03-25
2012-03-26
2012-03-27
2012-04-01
2012-04-02
2012-04-24
2012-04-26
2012-04-30
2012-05-10
2012-06-18
2012-06-20
2012-07-01
2012-07-24
2012-07-28
2012-07-29
2012-07-30
2012-07-31
2012-08-01
2012-08-02
2012-08-05
2012-08-06
2012-08-07
2012-08-08
2012-08-09
2012-08-10
2012-08-11
2012-08-12
2012-08-13
2012-08-14
2012-08-15
2012-08-16
2012-08-17
2012-08-18
2012-08-19
2012-08-20
2012-08-21
2012-08-22
2012-08-23
2012-08-24
2012-08-25
2012-08-26
2012-08-27
2012-08-29
2012-08-30
2012-08-31
2012-09-01
2012-09-02
2012-09-03
2012-09-04
2012-09-05

### Our Partners

ABC Color - Paraguay
Al Akhbar - Lebanon
Al Masry Al Youm - Egypt
Asia Sentinel - Hong Kong
Bivol - Bulgaria
Carta Capital - Brazil
CIPER - Chile
Dawn Media - Pakistan
L'Espresso - Italy
La Repubblica - Italy
La Jornada - Mexico
La Nacion - Costa Rica
Malaysia Today - Malaysia
McClatchy - United States
Nawaat - Tunisia
NDR/ARD - Germany
Owni - France
Pagina 12 - Argentina
Philip Dorling - Fairfax media contributor - Australia
Plaza Publica - Guatemala
Publica - Brazil
Publico.es - Spain
Rolling Stone - United States
Russian Reporter - Russia
Ta Nea - Greece
Taraf - Turkey
The Hindu - India
The Yes Men - Bhopal Activists
Sunday Star-Times - New Zealand

### Community resources

Supporters Support Wikileaks Follow us on Twitter Twitter this Follow us on Facebook

courage is contagious

# The Global Intelligence Files

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

## GF notes 100111

Released on 2012-05-10 01:00 GMT

Email-ID | 5361076
Date | 2010-01-12 00:04:54
From | Anya.Alfano@stratfor.com
To | anya.alfano@stratfor.com

News organization. Produces the news through Intelligence.
Market is wide open for what we do. Tremendous advantage. Established
brand. We produce an outstanding product.
Our challenge is that we're not well-enough known. There are some in
some areas that know us well, DOD and intel community, and spotty parts
of financial community. Bob's job is to do what he did in CQ. In
Washington, CQ was a publication you had to buy because you were afraid
not to buy it. You were afraid not to know what your competitors were
doing. Paranoid buying.
Unlike most companies that build large marketing department, we flipped
it. We have been trying, failing, shaping, reshaping, until we have a
product, or a core capability, that is not only valuable, but people buy
it. Not enough people buy it. But enough buy it that we are now at
overe 50k subscribers, actually more than a million.
When the US air force buys Stratfor, this means 300k people are
subscribers. If we were doing advertising, we would say we had 300k
subscribers. We won't say that. We impose a rule. We took the amount
they paid and divided it by $50--least we charge a bulk subscribers--and
said we had that many subscribers. 50k is what's needed to be taken
seriously. We have more than weekly standard and new republic. These
are well-known publications and we beat them. We're now at the
threshold. I could justify that we have 1.3 million subscribers, in the
sense that 1.3 million people have the right to read Stratfor.
2.4 million people read our product each week. Stolen information,
forwarding of weeklies, etc. That's a big footprint. We're moving from
being a small company to a modestly small company with over 100
employees all told. Bob is coming in to do all the things I don't know
how to do. I tried to do them and failed, best indication I don't know
how to do it. I'm not interested in doing it, building the "business
side of the company". What I did got us to this point but it won't get
us to the next point.
Bob is doing two things. First, he's a tremendous presence. Someone
from the NY Times said Bob Merry is an icon in Washington. He brings
tremendous credibility in publishing. On the side, he writes books
about James Polk and the conquest of Mexico and the the Cold War. He
understands, former counterintelligence for the army, 10 years at the
WSJ, and he likes building businesses, which is good because I don't
like building businesses. He's going to take care of that, and I'll
take care of intelligence. I'm in charge, but I'm not going to give
orders where previous orders have not succeeded.
We meet in product development. Right now we have one product--the
website. We write for the website and everything we know goes into it.
Our readers have said they hate the amount of material we deliver.
They're really saying they're interested as a consumer and want to
devote a certain amount of time, but don't want to devote their lives to
understanding, so you should be more selective. We also do things for
corporations in order to avoid venture capitalists. Venture capital
would wreck us, and this is an entirely new business, and they won't
allow you to make mistakes, but we will make mistakes. These contracts
are large enough to fund our growth. We can't meet the demands of the
VC, so this strategy works.
We are a self funding company--we own it and we use our revenue to build
the company. Bob Merry has come on board and we're about to change the
game by increasing revenues. To change the game we need revenues. To
get the money needed to change the game, we have to play some really
careful ball.
Stratfor can be as profitable as I want it to be. But we spend every
cent we get reinvesting in the company. The danger of not doing that is
standing still--someone else could come get us. In 2008, I went too far
toward SRM. My goal is to not do that again. We're going to redeploy
our resources very carefully.
In the consumer field, we're up against the economist--it's their market
we have to tap into. We have a market of about 2.8 million people
interested in international news. We're also fortunate to have other
markets. The economist sold its product to consumers and is desperate
to sell to business also--EIU--now a leading joke. Many reasons for
that. We have, Bob feels, the ability to sell to businesses. But most
businesses steal what we have and they're very proud of it. They don't
feel bad about it. That's what will happen in the electronic age. You
can go to war with customers, but that's not a good business model. You
need to have product differentiation--something different for corp
customers. Otherwise, I'll buy one license and send to my friends.
Consumer is buying because he wants to get smart, or because he enjoys
the subject. Sports fanatic--don't go to newspaper, they go to ESPN and
sports websites. Those customers who go to ESPN know a huge amount,
care about it, and can only be satisfied with a high quality product.
There is no market for a mediocre sports website.
Our consumer readers are not buying us as a throwaway. They buy because
they really care, and they're knowledgable and we need to meet
expectations by being smarter than they are. That's our task--give them
what they don't already know at a level that's suitable for someone not
living their life for this, and not overwhelming them with the latest
from Bolivia.
Corporations want information. If you are a business, you look at this
because you have decisions to make and you have to make them quickly and
intelligently. You appreciate analysis, but bombings in Khost don't
make you money. You need things that make you money. For that market,
we need a different range of products. We need information as quickly
as possible about what happened--sitreps. Third thing they want is
information.
Stratfor must become the single stop for news and information about the
international scene. That comes in three flavors:
1. Analysis we do now, among the most respected in the world. Barrons is
running an interview--they're using the interview for people to buy next
week's Barrons--interview with George Friedman on Russia. We're using
them as a hook to PR us. Circle jerk. Crazy. People read Barrons to
make money. People don't read us online to get money. They may
benefit, but that's not why they buy. Corporations only want to make
money. Offer them analysis. For gov't, CIA, Air Force, this is what
they want and they love it. For corporations, it's useful for about 30
members of the team. They want news before anyone else has it.
In Iran, we discovered that the flow of global information has
collapsed. Almost all newspapers were using one reformist website that
we tracked to a strip mall in Kirkland, Washington. Point is that as
poor as our sources were, we had a clearer picture of what was happening
than the New York Times. Their stories were from Beirut. We were in.
Our monitoring system, especially what we're developing with foreign
language sources, make us the only sources of systematic information
that we're collecting in open source. Add our own sources and the
relationship we're building with foreign press agencies, we are entering
systematically into relationships to share information. They get to
reprint us, and they tell us the inside story. We'll have one of the
finest flows of news. If we sort this through various technologies to
suit the needs of various corporate customers, we will have the ability
to rapidly sort and deliver our information.
2. Stream of intelligence from Stick's shop
3. There are vast numbers of databases that are valuable for national
trade. Example--IMF trade, UNCTAD. All are available and unusable. No
common platform, no interface. Bob Merry at CQ created over 30
databases, most from third parties, particularly the USG where it's all
free, and make them available if you logon to CQ. International trade
data, military data, econ data, single integrated interface for a single
step to get the product. People will pay to be able to access it. Our
value ad is the integration and database and added real time news and
superb analysis.
Good part--I know how to do it and Bob knows how to sell it. It's
exactly what he did at CQ. Some of the work patterns will need to be
refined. Some will need to change. We're looking at ways to right size
our offering to the consumer. Right now, everyone has an idea of
something to write, but we may say don't write, read instead. More time
for analysts to think, and less intel in the construct of articles.
Hard to think if you also have to write, must step back from that.
We also need to take the sitrep flow more seriously. The tasking of
watch officers by analysts is extremely poor. Must be done daily.
Information given to watch officers about sites is poor. Sitreps come
out and disappear, regardless of their importance. Some need to be
stirepped, some need to be shortrepped. Some analysis should be short,
some long. All a question of restructuring what we offer. We'll start
with the consumer. Prepare ourselves for what we'll offer the
institutional market.
Bob is going to take a few months to build and design the sales and
marketing team. Take a good look at IT platform and so on. I'm
starting now to restructure analysis and not so much as an organization
but in terms of mindset and skills. The net assessment program was one
of them. We talk about net assessments as well as every week talking to
you about business or processes or a skill to learn or what have you.
We can't grow unless we learn to train and mentor. We can't hire from
the outside. That can't be done. Our training and mentoring skills are
critical. All of this is in anticipation of opening to new markets that
we haven't served extensively and also producing a better product for
the consumer. The more effective we are, the more money we make, the
more we reinvest and get raises and other things you're interested in.
That's where we are. Bob is working with people in sales and marketing,
who are now walking around with daised looks on their faces. He is very
demanding, as I am, and I'm sitting here, going back to the beginning.
I'm going back to basics to make sure we're all on the same page.
That' sthe business model to attack the consumer and corporate markets.
That breaks the rules--you're only supposed to do one. But in this
case, the leveragability of the product and process makes sense. Grant
Perry really understands consumer product, and Bob Merry understands the
corporate situation. Because we have the skills and visibility, we have
a benchmark to launch off of.