Manoj Bhargava - Navo

• Manoj Bhargava's 5-Hour Energy weathered some negative publicity this past year. In 2012 the Indian-born mogul's ubiquitous energy shots were named by the Food & Drug Administration as having possibly contributed to 13 deaths in four years. 
• Parent company Living Essentials responded that it was "unaware of any deaths proven to be caused by the consumption of 5-Hour Energy." Bhargava joined the Forbes Billionaires list last year, having taken a highly unusual career path. 
• A math whiz, he moved to Philadelphia with his family as a teen, and soon headed to Princeton University, but dropped out after freshman year. He went back to India, where he lived as a monk in the mountains for 12 years. 
• After returning to the U.S, he forged a successful career in plastics then stumbled upon a formula for energy shots at a health trade fair. 
• His two-ounce caffeine and vitamin elixir, 5-Hour Energy, promises to keep users alert without crashing, and claims a 90%-plus market share in the energy shot sector. 
• The brand gets its own boost from its distinctive red bottles and deliberately corny, low-cost TV ads.  Manoj Bhargava owns 35% of 5-Hour's parent company; he pledged another 45% to charitable causes in poverty-stricken rural India.

Supersonic Transport - Navo

Supersonic Transport. In late 1962, the governments of France and Great Britain announced their intention to jointly develop a supersonic transport (SST) named the "Concorde." Anxious that the United States not trail the Europeans in the SST market as it had in the case of jet airliners, President John F. Kennedy, in a June 1963 speech at the Air Force Academy, called for a jointly funded government-industry program to design and build an American SST.

The specifications, drawn from a government feasibility study, called for a passenger capacity of 300 and a cruising speed from 2.5 to 3 times that of sound—both better than Concorde's. Boeing and Lockheed, two of the three major commercial jet manufacturers, produced full-sized mockups for a 1967 design competition. 

Boeing's design was heavier and more complex but promised slightly better performance and a significantly more impressive, futuristic look. 

It won, but engineers later abandoned its most advanced features as they struggled to build a plane light enough to operate profitably. 

The final design, the 2707-300, mirrored Concorde in both appearance and performance. Opposition to the SST project emerged on multiple fronts during the late 1960.