Now that I have your attention let me clarify. In the scheme of life there are rules and regulations that are fairly obvious and useful. These laws were inacted when the country began and existed before that in England and other places. I am thinking of things like no robbing, no murder, no rape, etc.
After several hundred years the opportunity to enact new intelligent laws starts to be a bit thin. Advances in technology or societal changes will bring about new rules but these don't occur daily. In order for politicians to feel useful and have something to do besides spend out money they come up with mediocre or downright awful regulations.
My favorite law to pick on is the Seatbelt Law. The use of a seatbelt is not stupid, not using one is actually fairly unintelligent given the trade off, live through an accident or die. That isn't the issue, the issue is that the politicians felt they had to make a law to force individuals to use a seatbelt when the cost of not using one is shouldered by the one not using it.
Granted some individuals will be severely injured in a car wreck as opposed to killed and thus end up on the public dole but I have to think the number here is fairly small. If someone wants to not wear a seatbelt go ahead and let them.
On the flip side of this discussion is smoking. Smoking kills those who do it and according to all the hoopla can kill those simply in the area of those smoking. I think 'area' is relative, if you are in a smoky bar it sure can kill you, if you are on the street it is more likely simply annoying as all get out as opposed to seriously deadly.
The politicians have passed laws making it illegal to smoke under a certain age and banned smoking in public places and on an on but smoking is still legal. So here we have seatbelts that really only effect the person in the seat versus smoking that kills all. Spock would be catatonic trying to figure out the logic in these rules since there is none when taken together.
Perhaps he would be able to figure in the $$$ doled out by the cigarette firms to politicians and paid in taxes and come to an understanding. If something provides the politicians with more money to spend as well as campaign funds it is OK even if it kills people.
If you want further evidence of the lack of intelligent things to do in politics start reading the US Tax Code. They will tinker with this time and time again but make it simple and logical - not a chance.
I wonder if the law stating a job will expand to fill the time alloted to it has come into play in politics? They really have nothing to do so they make up stuff to fill the time and look busy.
Friday, December 30, 2005
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Workers Unions
I will start by saying that I believe Unions have a valuable place in society and in the development of the United States into the successful nation that it is today. This does not mean that I believe Unions are perfect. I believe that they have their place and their time and then they seem become a burden to society and a detriment to further progress.
What is the role of a union? It is to get the best deal for the workers and look after their interests. American laws grant unions exemptions to the monopoly rules so they can represent the entire workforce of a single company or many companies.
When a group of workers is being exploited this is a required tool. The hotel maids and office building cleaning staffs are an area that has seen a lot of activity as of late. These employees are paid very low wages and are frequently immigrants who have little or no knowledge of American law. With their education levels (frequently basic at best) and lack of English language skills they are easy prey for large corporations. Unions are able to band these employees together and provide them with basic knowledge of the law in the US, making sure they receive what they legally deserve and helping garner them better wages.
This union power can also be extended too far. The Autoworkers Union is a classic case although far from the only example. As the US auto industry dragged itself into oblivion the union kept demanding more and refusing to give up anything it previously received. This is good for union leaders since the members like getting more and vote to keep them in power. Only recently while the automakers have been choking to death have the unions been forced to surrender some benefits. In prior periods the Union could threaten to strike and the companies were at a point where they were losing money but not as much as during a strike so they would cave. Now a strike would send a company into bankruptcy so the union's hand has been called. They have lost the power to hurt the company without killing themselves in the process.
Despite my blaming the union it should be noted that the management of the auto companies shares the blame for their current problems. Unions just capitalized on the weak and ineffectual management. US automobiles are boring and generally pieces of crap that die around 50,000 miles if they make it that long. Japanese autos are just getting their first tune up at that point. My last car was a Chevy Blazer, the handle used to adjust the angled of the seat back had a habit of breaking off. I hadn't realized this until both of mine broke off and I was talking with a friend who also had a Blazer. Their handles had broken off once, been fixed at a cost of something like $300 each and then broken off again. Once while the drivers seat was reclined and they were not at home. Despite this clear driving hazard there was no recall and Chevy would not replace the seats. This and other issues led me to trade it for a Toyota and to cancel my GM Credit card since I would not be using the rebate offered as an incentive. I digress.
Garment worker unions are another group that killed themselves and their industry with the help of corporate management and cheap overseas labor. Once they reached a certain level there was no coming back so they rushed over the precipice.
Over the holiday I was flying coast to coast and had the luxury of being held captive to a viewing of 'A Perfect Mind'. I can't help by tieing the theory from the gentleman in this movie to unions. The theory is that if everyone takes a little bit less then perfection then everyone comes out ahead. If you saw the movie the depiction was that if all the men went for the prettiest lady she would reject them and when they rebounded and approached her less lovely friends they would reject them as well since the ladies were a second choice. Meanwhile, if the men all went for the less lovely women they would be accepted and everyone would have a date except the beauty and thus be ahead over all even though no one scored the beauty.
I think Unions need to follow this logic a bit more. It isn't frequently in their long term best interest to get the absolute maximum for their members at every point in time as this robs the company of flexibility and should their be a downturn everyone is hurt - the company loses money to the point of bankruptcy and the union loses jobs weakening itself.
I propose that employee compensation needs to be tied more closely to corporate profits. Employees should receive a base compensation package that is comfortable but not overly generous. At the same time they should receive bonuses of a certain percentage of the corporate profits on a periodic basis (one year being the longest period). When a firm is doing good the employees profit and when things are tight the employees share in the pain. This type of alignment could be utilized to improve the corporations operations as employees strive to maximize profits to maximize their profit sharing.
I think this solution would also help with employee moral during good times as too frequently corporations strive to maximize their profits on the backs of the employees, especially those not unionized. There is the risk of demoralization during lean times but this would tend to happen when the economy was in a dip so staff defections should be controllable and the base compensation will keep them from financial ruin.
Many workers will find this situation uncomfortable, they are used to fixed paychecks and don't like the uncertainty of profit sharing. What they should think about is that this is how management is paid, although at a much higher level I admit.
I also think companies should tie workers bonuses to management bonuses. If the boss gets a 200% bonus so should the workers. How often does the boss actually do something that directly leads to the improved profits - usually it is a result of the workers doing their job and not much more. If I sit and punch keys on a keyboard all day and the corporate profits double I deserve a reward just like the senior executives. They did exactly what they were supposed to do and so did I, why should their compensation be any different when it comes to bonus percentages?
Socialism here we come.
What is the role of a union? It is to get the best deal for the workers and look after their interests. American laws grant unions exemptions to the monopoly rules so they can represent the entire workforce of a single company or many companies.
When a group of workers is being exploited this is a required tool. The hotel maids and office building cleaning staffs are an area that has seen a lot of activity as of late. These employees are paid very low wages and are frequently immigrants who have little or no knowledge of American law. With their education levels (frequently basic at best) and lack of English language skills they are easy prey for large corporations. Unions are able to band these employees together and provide them with basic knowledge of the law in the US, making sure they receive what they legally deserve and helping garner them better wages.
This union power can also be extended too far. The Autoworkers Union is a classic case although far from the only example. As the US auto industry dragged itself into oblivion the union kept demanding more and refusing to give up anything it previously received. This is good for union leaders since the members like getting more and vote to keep them in power. Only recently while the automakers have been choking to death have the unions been forced to surrender some benefits. In prior periods the Union could threaten to strike and the companies were at a point where they were losing money but not as much as during a strike so they would cave. Now a strike would send a company into bankruptcy so the union's hand has been called. They have lost the power to hurt the company without killing themselves in the process.
Despite my blaming the union it should be noted that the management of the auto companies shares the blame for their current problems. Unions just capitalized on the weak and ineffectual management. US automobiles are boring and generally pieces of crap that die around 50,000 miles if they make it that long. Japanese autos are just getting their first tune up at that point. My last car was a Chevy Blazer, the handle used to adjust the angled of the seat back had a habit of breaking off. I hadn't realized this until both of mine broke off and I was talking with a friend who also had a Blazer. Their handles had broken off once, been fixed at a cost of something like $300 each and then broken off again. Once while the drivers seat was reclined and they were not at home. Despite this clear driving hazard there was no recall and Chevy would not replace the seats. This and other issues led me to trade it for a Toyota and to cancel my GM Credit card since I would not be using the rebate offered as an incentive. I digress.
Garment worker unions are another group that killed themselves and their industry with the help of corporate management and cheap overseas labor. Once they reached a certain level there was no coming back so they rushed over the precipice.
Over the holiday I was flying coast to coast and had the luxury of being held captive to a viewing of 'A Perfect Mind'. I can't help by tieing the theory from the gentleman in this movie to unions. The theory is that if everyone takes a little bit less then perfection then everyone comes out ahead. If you saw the movie the depiction was that if all the men went for the prettiest lady she would reject them and when they rebounded and approached her less lovely friends they would reject them as well since the ladies were a second choice. Meanwhile, if the men all went for the less lovely women they would be accepted and everyone would have a date except the beauty and thus be ahead over all even though no one scored the beauty.
I think Unions need to follow this logic a bit more. It isn't frequently in their long term best interest to get the absolute maximum for their members at every point in time as this robs the company of flexibility and should their be a downturn everyone is hurt - the company loses money to the point of bankruptcy and the union loses jobs weakening itself.
I propose that employee compensation needs to be tied more closely to corporate profits. Employees should receive a base compensation package that is comfortable but not overly generous. At the same time they should receive bonuses of a certain percentage of the corporate profits on a periodic basis (one year being the longest period). When a firm is doing good the employees profit and when things are tight the employees share in the pain. This type of alignment could be utilized to improve the corporations operations as employees strive to maximize profits to maximize their profit sharing.
I think this solution would also help with employee moral during good times as too frequently corporations strive to maximize their profits on the backs of the employees, especially those not unionized. There is the risk of demoralization during lean times but this would tend to happen when the economy was in a dip so staff defections should be controllable and the base compensation will keep them from financial ruin.
Many workers will find this situation uncomfortable, they are used to fixed paychecks and don't like the uncertainty of profit sharing. What they should think about is that this is how management is paid, although at a much higher level I admit.
I also think companies should tie workers bonuses to management bonuses. If the boss gets a 200% bonus so should the workers. How often does the boss actually do something that directly leads to the improved profits - usually it is a result of the workers doing their job and not much more. If I sit and punch keys on a keyboard all day and the corporate profits double I deserve a reward just like the senior executives. They did exactly what they were supposed to do and so did I, why should their compensation be any different when it comes to bonus percentages?
Socialism here we come.
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Real Estate taxes
Governments fund themselves via taxes as we all know. There are varying forms of taxes but a common one in the US is a tax on real estate by local towns and municipalities, perhaps this is common worldwide - don't know.
For years real estate in the US had a relatively uniform value so this tax performed well. Over the last 20 years or so real estate values have skyrocketed with varying factors resulting in some significant valuation differentials between fairly similar properties. An easy example of this would be waterfront property versus inland property. Otherwise identical properties in the same town have radically different values based upon proximity to water.
Many towns and/or states have laws on the books that require the re-valuation of property for tax purposes on a regular basis, some don't and just adjust values when sales occur but that is becoming less common. This re-valuation has led to the proverbial land rich, cash poor phenomenon among many long time residents of now valuable property. By nature, long time residents tend to be retirees on fixed incomes with the result being a forced sale of the property to avoid bankruptcy via real estate taxes.
Real Estate taxes tend to go to the local governments (with exceptions of course) and pay for significant indirect benefits such as police, fire, roads, schools and parks. Since the benefits are indirect it isn't possible to charge the folks using the services directly as an alternative means of paying for them.
My issue is that I don't see it being fair to charge an elderly home owner with a choice piece of property significantly more in taxes then a family of four living in a similar home. I feel that thier tax burden should be similar as well.
Some may feel that the tax system is fair since it taxes the rich but this isn't true. Many long term property owners are not rich and simply scored in the real estate lottery IF they should decide to sell.
As a result of the current system many pieces of real estate can only be sold to developers who split up the land and cram in as many homes as possible leading to the rabid development currently seen in the US.
I feel that the current Real Estate taxation system needs to be amended. I don't know the perfect solution and doubt there is one but feel a greater fairness can be attained and should be. I do not believe that there should be any attempt to align the taxes with usage of services - the family with children in school might be getting a bargain today but they compensate for this later in life when they assist in paying for their grandchildren's educations and so on.
Will politicians step up and improve this broken tax - of course not, the folks with expensive properties already know they are getting screwed so why upset those getting the bargains? Too bad, someday the system will break and then they will be forced to take drastic action.
For years real estate in the US had a relatively uniform value so this tax performed well. Over the last 20 years or so real estate values have skyrocketed with varying factors resulting in some significant valuation differentials between fairly similar properties. An easy example of this would be waterfront property versus inland property. Otherwise identical properties in the same town have radically different values based upon proximity to water.
Many towns and/or states have laws on the books that require the re-valuation of property for tax purposes on a regular basis, some don't and just adjust values when sales occur but that is becoming less common. This re-valuation has led to the proverbial land rich, cash poor phenomenon among many long time residents of now valuable property. By nature, long time residents tend to be retirees on fixed incomes with the result being a forced sale of the property to avoid bankruptcy via real estate taxes.
Real Estate taxes tend to go to the local governments (with exceptions of course) and pay for significant indirect benefits such as police, fire, roads, schools and parks. Since the benefits are indirect it isn't possible to charge the folks using the services directly as an alternative means of paying for them.
My issue is that I don't see it being fair to charge an elderly home owner with a choice piece of property significantly more in taxes then a family of four living in a similar home. I feel that thier tax burden should be similar as well.
Some may feel that the tax system is fair since it taxes the rich but this isn't true. Many long term property owners are not rich and simply scored in the real estate lottery IF they should decide to sell.
As a result of the current system many pieces of real estate can only be sold to developers who split up the land and cram in as many homes as possible leading to the rabid development currently seen in the US.
I feel that the current Real Estate taxation system needs to be amended. I don't know the perfect solution and doubt there is one but feel a greater fairness can be attained and should be. I do not believe that there should be any attempt to align the taxes with usage of services - the family with children in school might be getting a bargain today but they compensate for this later in life when they assist in paying for their grandchildren's educations and so on.
Will politicians step up and improve this broken tax - of course not, the folks with expensive properties already know they are getting screwed so why upset those getting the bargains? Too bad, someday the system will break and then they will be forced to take drastic action.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Morgan Freeman and Bill Cosby
Hats off to two men who are willing to stand up and speak the truth despite the overwhelming public pressure and condemnation that comes with it.
As long as differences are actively promoted integration can not fully occur.
At the same time people will always congregate with like kinds whatever that likeness may be so vigilance must be maintained to prevent the rise of hatred and bigotry. It is not always the standard differences such as Black vs. White or Judaism vs. everyone, take a look at Houston Teens vs. New Orleans Teens - ignorance comes in all forms and must be guarded against.
Could you imagine a White History Month (I know, every month is white history) or the NAAWP?
As long as differences are actively promoted integration can not fully occur.
At the same time people will always congregate with like kinds whatever that likeness may be so vigilance must be maintained to prevent the rise of hatred and bigotry. It is not always the standard differences such as Black vs. White or Judaism vs. everyone, take a look at Houston Teens vs. New Orleans Teens - ignorance comes in all forms and must be guarded against.
Could you imagine a White History Month (I know, every month is white history) or the NAAWP?
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Music Industry
I wish I had thought to name an all girl group the BlowUp Dolls and have them release single titled, "A Slut Like Me". Then again, that happens every few years so I still stand a chance.
Friday, December 16, 2005
Bonus - My Wife's Complaint
On Friday my wife takes the baby girl to My Gym - an exercise place for babies and small children. After today's visit they went across the street to a store called Tuesdays...... which sells home goods stuff. My wife was looking for picture frames.
The store displays were a disaster. Despite this she found a few items to acquire. She then went to checkout. There was a man there asking for a large bag from the clerks. They responded they didn't have any in a less then friendly manner without looking at the man. He then said he was deaf and repeated his question. The clerks simply got more surly and continued to not look at the man so he couldn't see their lips.
Another lady was leaving and reiterated - the man said he is deaf so he can't hear your response. The clerks gave her a nasty look. The man gave up and left. My wife's purchases were put in a paper bag and she asked why they couldn't have offered the man one of these. The still surly clerk said they didn't have any large bags......
Then my wife went to Von's next door. A place she hates due to an issue while once working there involving a manager, sexual harrassment and retribution. Too bad she didn't know a good lawyer at that time, she could have retired.
Anyway, standing outside the Von's were several of their teeny booper employees and the store manager all enjoying a cigarette. Did I mention they were RIGHT OUTSIDE the entrance, less then 10 feet away. Never mind that the rule in California is not within 25 feet of a public building, forget the entrance. My wife turned and left, there are plenty of other stores where the staff is a bit more curteous.
Maybe this had something to do with the stores being in the beach area which isn't really known for its maturity, I don't know. What I do know is that my wife won't even try to go back there.
PS- I don't care that the 20 somethings party around the beach, I did that when I was that age as well. I just don't care to see that attitude at a retail store that isn't targetting the beach/surfer crowd. Actually, the stores doing that are usually much nicer then what my wife experienced.
The store displays were a disaster. Despite this she found a few items to acquire. She then went to checkout. There was a man there asking for a large bag from the clerks. They responded they didn't have any in a less then friendly manner without looking at the man. He then said he was deaf and repeated his question. The clerks simply got more surly and continued to not look at the man so he couldn't see their lips.
Another lady was leaving and reiterated - the man said he is deaf so he can't hear your response. The clerks gave her a nasty look. The man gave up and left. My wife's purchases were put in a paper bag and she asked why they couldn't have offered the man one of these. The still surly clerk said they didn't have any large bags......
Then my wife went to Von's next door. A place she hates due to an issue while once working there involving a manager, sexual harrassment and retribution. Too bad she didn't know a good lawyer at that time, she could have retired.
Anyway, standing outside the Von's were several of their teeny booper employees and the store manager all enjoying a cigarette. Did I mention they were RIGHT OUTSIDE the entrance, less then 10 feet away. Never mind that the rule in California is not within 25 feet of a public building, forget the entrance. My wife turned and left, there are plenty of other stores where the staff is a bit more curteous.
Maybe this had something to do with the stores being in the beach area which isn't really known for its maturity, I don't know. What I do know is that my wife won't even try to go back there.
PS- I don't care that the 20 somethings party around the beach, I did that when I was that age as well. I just don't care to see that attitude at a retail store that isn't targetting the beach/surfer crowd. Actually, the stores doing that are usually much nicer then what my wife experienced.
Sears and my busy week
This week has no been to good for posting my thoughts. It isn't that I didn't have any, I have a whole series of topics to write about, I just didn't get to writing them. Travelling with a baby is unique and I am a creature of habit so altering a business trip that I make regularly proved difficult. I even forgot to remove my computer from it's bag at airport security - what an idiot.
When travelling with small children remember to take an extra bag or one larger then needed to get there - on the way home it will be full.
On to Sears. Sears is a goner. Within 10 years adults will recollect going to Sears and teenagers will be asking what is Sears?
Over the last year or two there have been extensive stories about KMart and then Sears when they merged. KMart was an investment darling when some hedge fund manager whose name I forget (Eddie Lampert or something like that I think) figured out how to game the bankruptcy process and come out of it holding a ton of the company for the bond holders and then somehow getting the stock price to skyrocket making it clear the bondholders got more then their fare share.
Other hedge funds and investors in distressed debt now worship Mr. Lampert (?). He made them a ton of money, not to mention what he did for his funds. Post bankruptcy KMart acquired/merged with Sears. Despite all this activity, the businesses of both companies are in the dumper. Things have been so bad that Mr. Lampert(?) stepped in as the CEO of the firm and is running things himself.
It is clear from articles in the media that Sears is being milked dry. Money is not being spent sprucing up the stores and holiday advertising was lame at best with other stores dominating the headlines. Everyone has said that Mr. Lampert's skill is in recognizing the value of real estate holdings in a company that otherwise don't show up on the balance sheet. This is how he initially scored with KMart when he dumped a bunch of land for a hefty price.
Sears has old property just like Kmart and some pretty sweet leases at malls. It sure looks like these will be milked and sold off and Sears will go the way of Montgomery Wards and Woolworths. The time to save Sears has passed.
I was thinking that a few years ago someone in charge at Sears should have looked at the retailing landscape and made a great leap. They almost did it when they tried out Brand Central but they were tied to their existing format and didn't want to take the risk.
Imagine a Sears store reorganized and laid out as a series of Big Box stores. You could keep your clothing and makeup in one section but break out hardware and electronics into seperate entities. I would propose physically seperating the 'stores' with distinct entrances and everything. Move away from the malls while you are at it for new locations and go into the new retail locations don't screw around like they did with Sears Homestore. Every area I have lived in has a strong regional furniture store or two, they advertise heavily and are generally in areas shoppers frequent. The only Homestore I ever saw was in an area that no one went to for shopping and was hard to access.
The other option would be to compete head to head with WalMart, slash prices and add food but I don't like that scenario. When Sears developed there were a lot of folks using tools so Sears was a great place to get all they needed. That isn't so anymore. Walmart with it's small tool section and tons of toys and everyday needs sucked in the crowd that used to go to Sears.
To keep selling what it has Sears needs to make it's products more accessible. Walk in and boom, there it is. Not walk in and wonder what escalator to take to the tools or where is automotive?
Automotive if done right could be HUGE. Dealerships open up their super garages with folks just waiting to write up the issue and hand it to the mechanics. Sears could convert to this model with a side for the basics like Oil Changes and it would be magic. Just don't bury the garage in the middle of the mall. If you do that tie it in with the valet parking and add on car wash, oil change, etc for a fee.
Oh well, I fear it is too late. If you are an investor and are considering Sears, figure out what the company is worth liquidated because that is where it is going.
When travelling with small children remember to take an extra bag or one larger then needed to get there - on the way home it will be full.
On to Sears. Sears is a goner. Within 10 years adults will recollect going to Sears and teenagers will be asking what is Sears?
Over the last year or two there have been extensive stories about KMart and then Sears when they merged. KMart was an investment darling when some hedge fund manager whose name I forget (Eddie Lampert or something like that I think) figured out how to game the bankruptcy process and come out of it holding a ton of the company for the bond holders and then somehow getting the stock price to skyrocket making it clear the bondholders got more then their fare share.
Other hedge funds and investors in distressed debt now worship Mr. Lampert (?). He made them a ton of money, not to mention what he did for his funds. Post bankruptcy KMart acquired/merged with Sears. Despite all this activity, the businesses of both companies are in the dumper. Things have been so bad that Mr. Lampert(?) stepped in as the CEO of the firm and is running things himself.
It is clear from articles in the media that Sears is being milked dry. Money is not being spent sprucing up the stores and holiday advertising was lame at best with other stores dominating the headlines. Everyone has said that Mr. Lampert's skill is in recognizing the value of real estate holdings in a company that otherwise don't show up on the balance sheet. This is how he initially scored with KMart when he dumped a bunch of land for a hefty price.
Sears has old property just like Kmart and some pretty sweet leases at malls. It sure looks like these will be milked and sold off and Sears will go the way of Montgomery Wards and Woolworths. The time to save Sears has passed.
I was thinking that a few years ago someone in charge at Sears should have looked at the retailing landscape and made a great leap. They almost did it when they tried out Brand Central but they were tied to their existing format and didn't want to take the risk.
Imagine a Sears store reorganized and laid out as a series of Big Box stores. You could keep your clothing and makeup in one section but break out hardware and electronics into seperate entities. I would propose physically seperating the 'stores' with distinct entrances and everything. Move away from the malls while you are at it for new locations and go into the new retail locations don't screw around like they did with Sears Homestore. Every area I have lived in has a strong regional furniture store or two, they advertise heavily and are generally in areas shoppers frequent. The only Homestore I ever saw was in an area that no one went to for shopping and was hard to access.
The other option would be to compete head to head with WalMart, slash prices and add food but I don't like that scenario. When Sears developed there were a lot of folks using tools so Sears was a great place to get all they needed. That isn't so anymore. Walmart with it's small tool section and tons of toys and everyday needs sucked in the crowd that used to go to Sears.
To keep selling what it has Sears needs to make it's products more accessible. Walk in and boom, there it is. Not walk in and wonder what escalator to take to the tools or where is automotive?
Automotive if done right could be HUGE. Dealerships open up their super garages with folks just waiting to write up the issue and hand it to the mechanics. Sears could convert to this model with a side for the basics like Oil Changes and it would be magic. Just don't bury the garage in the middle of the mall. If you do that tie it in with the valet parking and add on car wash, oil change, etc for a fee.
Oh well, I fear it is too late. If you are an investor and are considering Sears, figure out what the company is worth liquidated because that is where it is going.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Travelling with the Family
I travel regularly for work. I rarely have any issues and when I do they are minor or easily dealt with. This week I took my wife and baby daughter (10 months) with me to the Bay Area.
I checked on line and the flight status was fine and th airport was humming. We get to the airport early to deal with the baby stuff and life is wonderful. We are sitting in the lounge waiting when they announce that the flight has been cancelled. I look at the board - on time, I look at the counter screen - on time. How could this be?
I go to the counter and sure enough, the 9am flight is cancelled and we are rebooked on the 11:50 am flight. Wonderful. I watched, the status on the flight NEVER changed from On Time. All these wonderful innovation like flight alerts only work if the system driving it is updated. Somehow the counter lady knew but the computer didn't. Now I had to sit in the airport for 3 hours with a 10 month old who decided it was so exciting she wasn't napping.
Thanks to our seats we were able to watch everyone come through security. Talk about a farse (that how you spell that or is hooked on phonics showing?). I couldn't believe how many folks had scissors or knifes in their luggage and then acted baffled or upset when they were discovered and taken away. Of course they had the option to ship them home or check them but that was just too much for most folks to understand. Let's not forget that on the 23rd or sometime soon virtually all of these items would be allowed - why wait to implement this rule? Stupidity, if it is going into effect just do it.
Then there are those poor souls randomly selected for strip searches. Ok, I exagerate a bit, they didn't have to take off all their clothes. Most times this was fine but one lady had gone to the wrong terminal - she went to the American Terminal, not the Commuter Terminal. She had clearly not been very early to the airport or hadn't realized her mistake to quickly. She caught the inter terminal shuttle and was coming through security as the plane was boarding.
This is a tiny terminal so plane boarding gate was 20 feet from security.
She was pulled out for a complete search. She had a 5 year old child and a couple of luggage bags. The folks in security have discretion. They didn't need to open all her bags and search her shoes and hold her up as long as they did. But why be nice, our job is to search. To be fair, the lady was a spaz. Even once the search was over she couldn't seem to grasp the need to drag her luggage to the gate and get on the plane.
In conclusion I want to thank American Airlines for giving me the opportunity to view the security line for 3 hours and for the concern they showed to a frequent flyer such as myself. I will keep this in mind as I continue my travels from Southern California to the Bay Area and opt between AA and Southwest.
I checked on line and the flight status was fine and th airport was humming. We get to the airport early to deal with the baby stuff and life is wonderful. We are sitting in the lounge waiting when they announce that the flight has been cancelled. I look at the board - on time, I look at the counter screen - on time. How could this be?
I go to the counter and sure enough, the 9am flight is cancelled and we are rebooked on the 11:50 am flight. Wonderful. I watched, the status on the flight NEVER changed from On Time. All these wonderful innovation like flight alerts only work if the system driving it is updated. Somehow the counter lady knew but the computer didn't. Now I had to sit in the airport for 3 hours with a 10 month old who decided it was so exciting she wasn't napping.
Thanks to our seats we were able to watch everyone come through security. Talk about a farse (that how you spell that or is hooked on phonics showing?). I couldn't believe how many folks had scissors or knifes in their luggage and then acted baffled or upset when they were discovered and taken away. Of course they had the option to ship them home or check them but that was just too much for most folks to understand. Let's not forget that on the 23rd or sometime soon virtually all of these items would be allowed - why wait to implement this rule? Stupidity, if it is going into effect just do it.
Then there are those poor souls randomly selected for strip searches. Ok, I exagerate a bit, they didn't have to take off all their clothes. Most times this was fine but one lady had gone to the wrong terminal - she went to the American Terminal, not the Commuter Terminal. She had clearly not been very early to the airport or hadn't realized her mistake to quickly. She caught the inter terminal shuttle and was coming through security as the plane was boarding.
This is a tiny terminal so plane boarding gate was 20 feet from security.
She was pulled out for a complete search. She had a 5 year old child and a couple of luggage bags. The folks in security have discretion. They didn't need to open all her bags and search her shoes and hold her up as long as they did. But why be nice, our job is to search. To be fair, the lady was a spaz. Even once the search was over she couldn't seem to grasp the need to drag her luggage to the gate and get on the plane.
In conclusion I want to thank American Airlines for giving me the opportunity to view the security line for 3 hours and for the concern they showed to a frequent flyer such as myself. I will keep this in mind as I continue my travels from Southern California to the Bay Area and opt between AA and Southwest.
Sunday, December 11, 2005
New Orleans Hurricane
The topic of New Orleans and the disaster wrought by Hurricane Katrina have been on my mind since the storm hit.
I listened to a lot of name calling and blame being passed around various government agencies. Recently they even held hearings where several residents got to vent to congress. My first question is why the Mayor is getting off so easy?
There were discussions of studies conducted in New Orleans in regards to what the city could expect to have happen if the evacuation order were given. From what I heard the study findings were highly accurate. Unfortunately I forget the exact number but they were something like 40% of the population wouldn't leave the city either because they were stubborn fools who deserved to die when told a massive storm was coming and they should evacuate and they refused OR they were too poor to be able to afford to evacuate.
I don't believe it is the national governments responsibility to have evacuation plans in place for local cities when trouble first hits. Although some problems are foreseeable, like a big hurricane crossing the Atlantic, some aren't, like and earthquake, so local governments have to provide the first response to an emergency. When New Orleans ordered an evacuation they should have had a plan in place to put folks on buses and whatever to get them out of the area. Baton Rogue wasn't really that far away in the scheme of things, I doubt they had housing but I bet it would have beat riding out the storm in the city. There was no such plan. The Mayor is responsible for this and yet I don't see him getting called to answer for this failure. I wonder if it is because he is black and we all know the federal government didn't care because all those stranded were poor and black, making them democrats no doubt. I lost all respect for a few individuals who started spouting that garbage - enough said.
The post-Hurricane mess falls on a lot of shoulders. Once the city was wrecked the state and national governments have to step in and they both failed miserably. When they tried to do something they were fighting each other over control and failed to deal with this issue because they were all busy issuing press releases blaming each other for the problem.
The only thing I have heard that worked was the Astrodome in Houston. Kudos to the group that operated this evacuation point. A gentleman from the Coast Guard was in charge and according to all reports performed admirably - too bad the government treats the Coast Guard like a bastard step child while requiring so much from them. Perhaps the other services should have their budgets butchered, perhaps they would learn to perform better using what they have better. Wishful thinking and not really something I would want to test out. But do redirect your money to a satellite network that can track the Iraqi bombers!
After the disaster many communities opened their doors and took in the displaced, Houston perhaps taking in more then anyone else on a fairly permanent basis. Now the news is filled with stories of anti-New Orleans sentiments and ill feelings between the students from Houston and those from New Orleans in the local schools, especially high schools. At least one school had some serious rioting occur.
Now I could act like an ultra-right wing bigot and say it is a turf battle for the local drug trade in Houston but that would just be using extreme stereotypes and making myself to be an idiot. High School is a tough time for many people and is a place where people start identifying their place in the world and society. I think the sudden influx of a large number of new students dramatically upset this structure in Houston. Suddenly you go to school and you don't know a lot of the faces you see and you wonder about them. Then some of the new students will displace the status quo on sports teams or whatever it may be. Those displaced will be upset and blame the new students for their loss of stature, their life long friends will support them in this and suddenly you have riots in the schoolyard.
The news reported that graffiti had been sprayed on one high school door accusing the New Orleans girls of being sluts. I am sure this is debatable but once again it was the status quo being turned on its head, some Houston guys started dating some New Orleans girls and the Houston girls were upset. I bet if we did a little research we would find that the ladies from both towns are equally as promiscuous. The Houston guys probably just wanted something they hadn't already despoiled.
What Houston did taking in those displaced is laudable. I think social workers need to explore the issues that arose with the new students and learn how to better meld two disparate cultures in the future should another disaster like this strike.
The Mayor of New Orleans needs to accept responsiblity like the head of FEMA and resign taking his proper place in the past. The owners of a nursing home that failed to move it's patients resulting in the patients deaths are facing manslaughter charges, why shouldn't the mayor as well?
I almost forgot - the looters who shot at the rescue people and ended up getting shot and killed themselves, excellent! People who take advantage of situations like this and start rioting and acting like gangsters deserve what they get. I hope the individuals involved in shooting them are getting apropriate counseling, they don't deserve what they have to deal with. The widespread looting, I don't really have a problem with that in general, the stores were closed an folks needed food and in some cases clothes. Taking HD TVs and waht not, shoot them as well.
I listened to a lot of name calling and blame being passed around various government agencies. Recently they even held hearings where several residents got to vent to congress. My first question is why the Mayor is getting off so easy?
There were discussions of studies conducted in New Orleans in regards to what the city could expect to have happen if the evacuation order were given. From what I heard the study findings were highly accurate. Unfortunately I forget the exact number but they were something like 40% of the population wouldn't leave the city either because they were stubborn fools who deserved to die when told a massive storm was coming and they should evacuate and they refused OR they were too poor to be able to afford to evacuate.
I don't believe it is the national governments responsibility to have evacuation plans in place for local cities when trouble first hits. Although some problems are foreseeable, like a big hurricane crossing the Atlantic, some aren't, like and earthquake, so local governments have to provide the first response to an emergency. When New Orleans ordered an evacuation they should have had a plan in place to put folks on buses and whatever to get them out of the area. Baton Rogue wasn't really that far away in the scheme of things, I doubt they had housing but I bet it would have beat riding out the storm in the city. There was no such plan. The Mayor is responsible for this and yet I don't see him getting called to answer for this failure. I wonder if it is because he is black and we all know the federal government didn't care because all those stranded were poor and black, making them democrats no doubt. I lost all respect for a few individuals who started spouting that garbage - enough said.
The post-Hurricane mess falls on a lot of shoulders. Once the city was wrecked the state and national governments have to step in and they both failed miserably. When they tried to do something they were fighting each other over control and failed to deal with this issue because they were all busy issuing press releases blaming each other for the problem.
The only thing I have heard that worked was the Astrodome in Houston. Kudos to the group that operated this evacuation point. A gentleman from the Coast Guard was in charge and according to all reports performed admirably - too bad the government treats the Coast Guard like a bastard step child while requiring so much from them. Perhaps the other services should have their budgets butchered, perhaps they would learn to perform better using what they have better. Wishful thinking and not really something I would want to test out. But do redirect your money to a satellite network that can track the Iraqi bombers!
After the disaster many communities opened their doors and took in the displaced, Houston perhaps taking in more then anyone else on a fairly permanent basis. Now the news is filled with stories of anti-New Orleans sentiments and ill feelings between the students from Houston and those from New Orleans in the local schools, especially high schools. At least one school had some serious rioting occur.
Now I could act like an ultra-right wing bigot and say it is a turf battle for the local drug trade in Houston but that would just be using extreme stereotypes and making myself to be an idiot. High School is a tough time for many people and is a place where people start identifying their place in the world and society. I think the sudden influx of a large number of new students dramatically upset this structure in Houston. Suddenly you go to school and you don't know a lot of the faces you see and you wonder about them. Then some of the new students will displace the status quo on sports teams or whatever it may be. Those displaced will be upset and blame the new students for their loss of stature, their life long friends will support them in this and suddenly you have riots in the schoolyard.
The news reported that graffiti had been sprayed on one high school door accusing the New Orleans girls of being sluts. I am sure this is debatable but once again it was the status quo being turned on its head, some Houston guys started dating some New Orleans girls and the Houston girls were upset. I bet if we did a little research we would find that the ladies from both towns are equally as promiscuous. The Houston guys probably just wanted something they hadn't already despoiled.
What Houston did taking in those displaced is laudable. I think social workers need to explore the issues that arose with the new students and learn how to better meld two disparate cultures in the future should another disaster like this strike.
The Mayor of New Orleans needs to accept responsiblity like the head of FEMA and resign taking his proper place in the past. The owners of a nursing home that failed to move it's patients resulting in the patients deaths are facing manslaughter charges, why shouldn't the mayor as well?
I almost forgot - the looters who shot at the rescue people and ended up getting shot and killed themselves, excellent! People who take advantage of situations like this and start rioting and acting like gangsters deserve what they get. I hope the individuals involved in shooting them are getting apropriate counseling, they don't deserve what they have to deal with. The widespread looting, I don't really have a problem with that in general, the stores were closed an folks needed food and in some cases clothes. Taking HD TVs and waht not, shoot them as well.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
Soft Dollars continued
Kudos to Fidelity for announcing that they are eliminating the usage of Soft Dollars for everything including the payments for third party investment research.
Everyone should get in line and follow their lead.
All those who think compliance and oms systems should be allowed under soft dollars should be shot!
Everyone should get in line and follow their lead.
All those who think compliance and oms systems should be allowed under soft dollars should be shot!
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Iranian Airline Crash
Hmm, if a US plane in Iraq went down with 47 journalists on board the media would be accusing Bush of targetting them......
Monday, December 05, 2005
Immigrants, Unemployment and Foreign Outsourcing
A lot of people get very upset with illegal immigrants and want to do anything to stop them as well as send those here already back home. I don't really know their arguments but frequently they go on about how it is costing US workers their jobs. Completely ignoring the fact that our current unemployment rate is still at a very low 5% and that no American wants to do most of the jobs held by immigrants, illegal or legal.
Walmart has recently drawn some heat because companies it hires to handle some tasks such as store cleaning have hired illegal immigrants. You can argue whether or not Walmart knew about this but the bottom line is that the company doing the work was the low bidder for the job and they hired the cheapest labor they could find. This is the exact same thing that every other company in America and the world does. How do you think companies keep racking up growing earnings? It isn't simply by increasing sales of products, frequently it is by reducing costs.
When is the last time you heard an American say they would pay more to help prevent illegal immigration? Similarly, you have heard the belly aching about jobs moving overseas yet when was the last time you offered to pay more to keep a job in the US?
Even with all the jobs moving to India, China and the Phillipines we are hardly hurting as a nation. Sure, there are pockets of the country either by region or particular skill set that are doing poorly but that will always be the case. Economies grow and change which results in some skill sets being left behind and new ones stepping in to fill the gaps. How those left behind react and are absorbed by the new economy is always stressful with some being left out, a painful experience both for the individuals and the country witnessing it, that is an issue we should address.
Until each of you is ready to step up and accept lower profits from your companies, higher costs for your purchases, lower incomes and so on, stop complaining about immigration and foreign outsourcing. It is here to stay as long as their are incentives and our lifestyle is so rich in comparison to most of the world we will continue to have both.
Walmart has recently drawn some heat because companies it hires to handle some tasks such as store cleaning have hired illegal immigrants. You can argue whether or not Walmart knew about this but the bottom line is that the company doing the work was the low bidder for the job and they hired the cheapest labor they could find. This is the exact same thing that every other company in America and the world does. How do you think companies keep racking up growing earnings? It isn't simply by increasing sales of products, frequently it is by reducing costs.
When is the last time you heard an American say they would pay more to help prevent illegal immigration? Similarly, you have heard the belly aching about jobs moving overseas yet when was the last time you offered to pay more to keep a job in the US?
Even with all the jobs moving to India, China and the Phillipines we are hardly hurting as a nation. Sure, there are pockets of the country either by region or particular skill set that are doing poorly but that will always be the case. Economies grow and change which results in some skill sets being left behind and new ones stepping in to fill the gaps. How those left behind react and are absorbed by the new economy is always stressful with some being left out, a painful experience both for the individuals and the country witnessing it, that is an issue we should address.
Until each of you is ready to step up and accept lower profits from your companies, higher costs for your purchases, lower incomes and so on, stop complaining about immigration and foreign outsourcing. It is here to stay as long as their are incentives and our lifestyle is so rich in comparison to most of the world we will continue to have both.
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Idiots in the Crowd
I can't believe I didn't mention this before.
A personal pet peeve is the person or groups of people who have no consideration for others in public. How many times have you been in a crowd moving along when suddenly someone in front of you stops. Everyone behind them jerks to a halt and all forward progress ceases. meanwhile the offending party looks around oblivious to the fact that they just interrupted everyone elses lives.
All I would ask for is a bit of consideration for others around them. At least make an effort to move to the side of the crowd, do something that makes me think you aren't simply a rude ignorant person who cares only about yourself.
I have had this happen to me in crowded areas as well as when there is no one but the person or group in front of me. I have seen single folks do it and entire gangs. Folks with strollers are horrific offenders. There are some places a stroller doesn't belong, it isn't like a wheelchair, so don't take them there.
Besides stopping dead center in front of the crowd there are those who decide an entire sidewalk is theirs. It doesn't matter the width of the sidewalk, there is always a group who spread out and walk next to each other, covering the entire expanse. As you approach, sidling to the right as is appropriate in the states, they fail to yield or move over. I don't know what they are expecting you to do, jump into the hedge to get out of their way? Are they so insecure that they will feel inferior if they drop behind and have to follow their companions?
I have begun to get so irritated by these infractions upon my ability to walk that my fuse can be a bit short. I take great pleasure in being passively aggresive and commenting about the offender to any companion or perhaps just out loud to myself. I don't really care what they think of me since their offense has already permenantly placed them below me on the social scale. Those who fail to get out of the way when passing might get a little extra bump with, "Oh, I am sooo sorry. I expected you to attempt to avoid a coolision as much as I did, how foolish of me"
Amazingly these folks then have the nerve to look at me like I am rude, can you imagine?
A personal pet peeve is the person or groups of people who have no consideration for others in public. How many times have you been in a crowd moving along when suddenly someone in front of you stops. Everyone behind them jerks to a halt and all forward progress ceases. meanwhile the offending party looks around oblivious to the fact that they just interrupted everyone elses lives.
All I would ask for is a bit of consideration for others around them. At least make an effort to move to the side of the crowd, do something that makes me think you aren't simply a rude ignorant person who cares only about yourself.
I have had this happen to me in crowded areas as well as when there is no one but the person or group in front of me. I have seen single folks do it and entire gangs. Folks with strollers are horrific offenders. There are some places a stroller doesn't belong, it isn't like a wheelchair, so don't take them there.
Besides stopping dead center in front of the crowd there are those who decide an entire sidewalk is theirs. It doesn't matter the width of the sidewalk, there is always a group who spread out and walk next to each other, covering the entire expanse. As you approach, sidling to the right as is appropriate in the states, they fail to yield or move over. I don't know what they are expecting you to do, jump into the hedge to get out of their way? Are they so insecure that they will feel inferior if they drop behind and have to follow their companions?
I have begun to get so irritated by these infractions upon my ability to walk that my fuse can be a bit short. I take great pleasure in being passively aggresive and commenting about the offender to any companion or perhaps just out loud to myself. I don't really care what they think of me since their offense has already permenantly placed them below me on the social scale. Those who fail to get out of the way when passing might get a little extra bump with, "Oh, I am sooo sorry. I expected you to attempt to avoid a coolision as much as I did, how foolish of me"
Amazingly these folks then have the nerve to look at me like I am rude, can you imagine?
Holiday Cheer
Dr. Suess lived in San Diego. Apparently, now that he is gone, the Grinch has stayed behind to stir up trouble. This past weekend the annual event now billed as Holiday at the Park or something like that, formerly known as Christmas on the Prado, was held.
For those of you unfamiliar with Southern California and/or this event, it has been held for upteen years and has always been well attended and a success. Two years ago, the group running it committed a tragic sin. They failed to raise enough money to pay for the event and didn't really tell anyone about the problem until one day when they surprised the city by announcing that the event was cancelled due to a $70,000 shortfall in fundraising. Immediately companies offered the required sum but the group said it was too late. They had already told the entertainers that they were free to go elsewhere.
Long story short, the city stepped in, un-cancelled the event and everything was wonderful.
This problem apparently led to some changes in the organization operating the event and now a big corporate sponsor provides most of the funding. This year it was the Indian Casinos and it will probably remain them for some time. Shortly the name will be the Celebration of the Casinos at the Park but that will take a few years.
I don't think I went to the event last year but this year we got the gang together and ventured forth. One means of entering the Park is to cross a bridge from 6th avenue over the 163. This is an older bridge with 2 lanes for cars (one each way) and sidewalks on each side.
In previous years the bridge was simply a means of eggress. This year they put restaurant tents on the bridge and sold tickets to get samples from the tents. This act eliminated about 1/4 of the bridges width. Now add in several thousand people trying to cross the bridge to get into the park and long lines stretching out from the tents and you suddenly find the bridge locked in gridlock.
Never mind the idiots who decide they need to cover up their young children who are riding in strollers so they stop, turn the stroller sideways across the bridges and then stand in front if it trying to get out a blanket which they then can't seem to fasten around the child adequately. I guess my next topic will be inconsiderate idiots in busy, crowded areas.
This food sample idea is actually a smashingly successful fundraiser for the San Diego Zoo. Their event gets VERY crowded as well. The organizers of Holiday in the Park had to be up to their idiotic standards of two years prior to think putting the tents on the bridge was a good idea. Further, by stealing the idea from the zoo they take one more step towards homogenizing all the events in San Diego, after all, who wants anything unique.
This event has always been crowded, the international houses have always sold food from thier respective countries to raise funds and the lines have always been crazy. There was some attempts to shift some of the country vendors out of the houses and into other areas of the park, I highly commend these attempts as they seemes to lessen the crowds in the houses.
I dealt with the crowds in the past but can't stand the bridge impasse. Like many events it has become a victim of it's own success and I don't anticipate that I will be attending very often in the future. My kids might want the experience when they grow up but until then I can make my own Irish Stew and Swedish Meatballs.
For those of you unfamiliar with Southern California and/or this event, it has been held for upteen years and has always been well attended and a success. Two years ago, the group running it committed a tragic sin. They failed to raise enough money to pay for the event and didn't really tell anyone about the problem until one day when they surprised the city by announcing that the event was cancelled due to a $70,000 shortfall in fundraising. Immediately companies offered the required sum but the group said it was too late. They had already told the entertainers that they were free to go elsewhere.
Long story short, the city stepped in, un-cancelled the event and everything was wonderful.
This problem apparently led to some changes in the organization operating the event and now a big corporate sponsor provides most of the funding. This year it was the Indian Casinos and it will probably remain them for some time. Shortly the name will be the Celebration of the Casinos at the Park but that will take a few years.
I don't think I went to the event last year but this year we got the gang together and ventured forth. One means of entering the Park is to cross a bridge from 6th avenue over the 163. This is an older bridge with 2 lanes for cars (one each way) and sidewalks on each side.
In previous years the bridge was simply a means of eggress. This year they put restaurant tents on the bridge and sold tickets to get samples from the tents. This act eliminated about 1/4 of the bridges width. Now add in several thousand people trying to cross the bridge to get into the park and long lines stretching out from the tents and you suddenly find the bridge locked in gridlock.
Never mind the idiots who decide they need to cover up their young children who are riding in strollers so they stop, turn the stroller sideways across the bridges and then stand in front if it trying to get out a blanket which they then can't seem to fasten around the child adequately. I guess my next topic will be inconsiderate idiots in busy, crowded areas.
This food sample idea is actually a smashingly successful fundraiser for the San Diego Zoo. Their event gets VERY crowded as well. The organizers of Holiday in the Park had to be up to their idiotic standards of two years prior to think putting the tents on the bridge was a good idea. Further, by stealing the idea from the zoo they take one more step towards homogenizing all the events in San Diego, after all, who wants anything unique.
This event has always been crowded, the international houses have always sold food from thier respective countries to raise funds and the lines have always been crazy. There was some attempts to shift some of the country vendors out of the houses and into other areas of the park, I highly commend these attempts as they seemes to lessen the crowds in the houses.
I dealt with the crowds in the past but can't stand the bridge impasse. Like many events it has become a victim of it's own success and I don't anticipate that I will be attending very often in the future. My kids might want the experience when they grow up but until then I can make my own Irish Stew and Swedish Meatballs.
Direct TV Advertisement....
I was doing my usual fair share of tv watching Sunday morning when I saw an ad for Direct TV. A young child approaches his Dad and asks him to read to him. The Dad is busily watching a football game or some other sporting event. The Dad says 'No' because Football is just so much more important then his sons healthy development.
The son is dejected so the father proceeds to show how he can perform magic by pausing the game and continuing it. Snap fingers on one hand and secretly hit remote with other, clever, or so someone at the ad agency thought I am sure.
What kind of image is Direct TV trying to put out there? Ignore your childrens desire to learn and broaden their minds with something educational like reading and show them how cool your Direct TV with DVR is? Sounds like a wise plan to me.
I still can't figure out why I would want satellite TV when cable has too much to offer but this sure isn't the means to win me over and if you live in a major metro area with cable readily available you should voice your opinion and dump Direct TV - maybe go with the other satellite firm, but let Direct TV know that they do not prevail over ignorance.
The son is dejected so the father proceeds to show how he can perform magic by pausing the game and continuing it. Snap fingers on one hand and secretly hit remote with other, clever, or so someone at the ad agency thought I am sure.
What kind of image is Direct TV trying to put out there? Ignore your childrens desire to learn and broaden their minds with something educational like reading and show them how cool your Direct TV with DVR is? Sounds like a wise plan to me.
I still can't figure out why I would want satellite TV when cable has too much to offer but this sure isn't the means to win me over and if you live in a major metro area with cable readily available you should voice your opinion and dump Direct TV - maybe go with the other satellite firm, but let Direct TV know that they do not prevail over ignorance.
Friday, December 02, 2005
Soft Dollars and Mutual Funds
Back to an industry I know. Mutual Funds. For years mutual fund companies have been stretching the definition of Research under the soft dollar safe window regulations. This allowed them to do business with X broker who would then pay for research related items like office space and computers for research analysts hired by the investment manager.
Recently this has drawn some attention and most firms have retreated from the extreme uses of soft dollars and many are phasing them out as the contracts come due annually for various services. Just in time for the SEC to propose changing the rules tightening up on the usage of soft dollars, handy how they work so closely together isn't it?
Funny thing I have seen happening. A number of vendors to the investment management community had these lucrative little arrangements where they classified their systems as 'research' and had them paid via soft dollars. Some went so far as to set up brokerage units that the clients would credit with trades so that the brokerage paid the cost of the system and not the investment manager.
The new rules wreck these arrangements so the vendors are up in arms and are making comments about the new rules. The investment managers are staying pretty quiet.
I would love to be hired to audit firms for thier uses of soft dollars. I know a couple of systems being paid for in this manner that are clearly NOT research despite all proclamations so I think I could easily receive settlements for the government that pay for the cost of hiring me and anyone else they need to assist and handle the legal work. I wouldn't even bother with the firms - just go to the vendors and have field day.
Recently this has drawn some attention and most firms have retreated from the extreme uses of soft dollars and many are phasing them out as the contracts come due annually for various services. Just in time for the SEC to propose changing the rules tightening up on the usage of soft dollars, handy how they work so closely together isn't it?
Funny thing I have seen happening. A number of vendors to the investment management community had these lucrative little arrangements where they classified their systems as 'research' and had them paid via soft dollars. Some went so far as to set up brokerage units that the clients would credit with trades so that the brokerage paid the cost of the system and not the investment manager.
The new rules wreck these arrangements so the vendors are up in arms and are making comments about the new rules. The investment managers are staying pretty quiet.
I would love to be hired to audit firms for thier uses of soft dollars. I know a couple of systems being paid for in this manner that are clearly NOT research despite all proclamations so I think I could easily receive settlements for the government that pay for the cost of hiring me and anyone else they need to assist and handle the legal work. I wouldn't even bother with the firms - just go to the vendors and have field day.
Soft Dollars and Mutual Funds
Back to an industry I know. Mutual Funds. For years mutual fund companies have been stretching the definition of Research under the soft dollar safe window regulations. This allowed them to do business with X broker who would then pay for research related items like office space and computers for research analysts hired by the investment manager.
Recently this has drawn some attention and most firms have retreated from the extreme uses of soft dollars and many are phasing them out as the contracts come due annually for various services. Just in time for the SEC to propose changing the rules tightening up on the usage of soft dollars, handy how they work so closely together isn't it?
Funny thing I have seen happening. A number of vendors to the investment management community had these lucrative little arrangements where they classified their systems as 'research' and had them paid via soft dollars. Some went so far as to set up brokerage units that the clients would credit with trades so that the brokerage paid the cost of the system and not the investment manager.
The new rules wreck these arrangements so the vendors are up in arms and are making comments about the new rules. The investment managers are staying pretty quiet.
I would love to be hired to audit firms for thier uses of soft dollars. I know a couple of systems being paid for in this manner that are clearly NOT research despite all proclamations so I think I could easily receive settlements for the government that pay for the cost of hiring me and anyone else they need to assist and handle the legal work. I wouldn't even bother with the firms - just go to the vendors and have field day.
Recently this has drawn some attention and most firms have retreated from the extreme uses of soft dollars and many are phasing them out as the contracts come due annually for various services. Just in time for the SEC to propose changing the rules tightening up on the usage of soft dollars, handy how they work so closely together isn't it?
Funny thing I have seen happening. A number of vendors to the investment management community had these lucrative little arrangements where they classified their systems as 'research' and had them paid via soft dollars. Some went so far as to set up brokerage units that the clients would credit with trades so that the brokerage paid the cost of the system and not the investment manager.
The new rules wreck these arrangements so the vendors are up in arms and are making comments about the new rules. The investment managers are staying pretty quiet.
I would love to be hired to audit firms for thier uses of soft dollars. I know a couple of systems being paid for in this manner that are clearly NOT research despite all proclamations so I think I could easily receive settlements for the government that pay for the cost of hiring me and anyone else they need to assist and handle the legal work. I wouldn't even bother with the firms - just go to the vendors and have field day.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
The War
Since everyone else is putting in their 2 cents worth so will I.
It is a fact that the basis for going to war was Wrong. There is no arguing that Iraq did not have the weapons of mass destruction as we were led to believe. Was this done on purpose? I don't know and neither do you. It is all water under the bridge and not worth arguing about until the war is over and everyone home.
Should we pull out? No. Once we invaded the country we have an obligation to finish the job and install a stable regime that can defend itself and it's citizens. Until this is done we stay and suffer the costs and deaths associated with being there.
My real question about the war has to do with technology and all those lovely tricks that I have seen in war movies over the past few years and read in various books. We know that the insurgents are planting road side bombs on the most traveled routes. Why don't we have satellites in orbit over Iraq constantly monitoring the ground and identifying patterns where someone is planting a bomb? With computer technology they should be able to pick up all the moving pieces on a road and around it. Then they can watch for aberrations such as an unexpected stop in a lonely area and then continued movement. Supposedly a computer could do this with ease and notify the military that X spot is likely a bomb. Experience could lead to a refined process so there aren't many false alarms or perhaps that is when a human sitting in the Pentagon steps in and reviews the tape to actually see if someone stopped and put a bomb down. If a bomb is planted then the person doing so can be tracked to their current location and/or back to where they came from. Same goes for car bombs. Ok, we can't really pick them out of the crowd but once one goes off you could backtrack through the surveillance tapes and find it's source. Then blow the hell out of the source. You do enough of this tracking you could bounce from the car bomb to it's garage source then follow all the folks that went in and out of the garage and you find some safe houses, etc, etc.
Insurgents crossing the borders with Syria? Now you have proof and can track them and eliminate them. Imagine the Syrian ambassador when you pop in the tape of folks crossing the border. Heck, air that tape on Al-Jazeera and then shut down all movement into and out of Syria - period - until they play ball. We are dieing here folks.
I have heard the folks paranoid about big brother, I don't think they have anything to fear if we can't use our current technology to track these bastards in Iraq. Personally, all the new bombers and boats and bombs should be put on hold until the system I have in mind is up and running.
The 3 Bs won't save lives in the short term and a surveillance system will and could be used repeatedly for similar problems. Drug dealers in the jungles - tracked. Illegal immigrants at the border - tracked. Terrorists the world over - tracked. Historical sites being pillaged by tomb robbers - tracked.
Why isn’t' the media all over this? Because they don't want to actually help solve a problem, they need problems to stay in business.
It is a fact that the basis for going to war was Wrong. There is no arguing that Iraq did not have the weapons of mass destruction as we were led to believe. Was this done on purpose? I don't know and neither do you. It is all water under the bridge and not worth arguing about until the war is over and everyone home.
Should we pull out? No. Once we invaded the country we have an obligation to finish the job and install a stable regime that can defend itself and it's citizens. Until this is done we stay and suffer the costs and deaths associated with being there.
My real question about the war has to do with technology and all those lovely tricks that I have seen in war movies over the past few years and read in various books. We know that the insurgents are planting road side bombs on the most traveled routes. Why don't we have satellites in orbit over Iraq constantly monitoring the ground and identifying patterns where someone is planting a bomb? With computer technology they should be able to pick up all the moving pieces on a road and around it. Then they can watch for aberrations such as an unexpected stop in a lonely area and then continued movement. Supposedly a computer could do this with ease and notify the military that X spot is likely a bomb. Experience could lead to a refined process so there aren't many false alarms or perhaps that is when a human sitting in the Pentagon steps in and reviews the tape to actually see if someone stopped and put a bomb down. If a bomb is planted then the person doing so can be tracked to their current location and/or back to where they came from. Same goes for car bombs. Ok, we can't really pick them out of the crowd but once one goes off you could backtrack through the surveillance tapes and find it's source. Then blow the hell out of the source. You do enough of this tracking you could bounce from the car bomb to it's garage source then follow all the folks that went in and out of the garage and you find some safe houses, etc, etc.
Insurgents crossing the borders with Syria? Now you have proof and can track them and eliminate them. Imagine the Syrian ambassador when you pop in the tape of folks crossing the border. Heck, air that tape on Al-Jazeera and then shut down all movement into and out of Syria - period - until they play ball. We are dieing here folks.
I have heard the folks paranoid about big brother, I don't think they have anything to fear if we can't use our current technology to track these bastards in Iraq. Personally, all the new bombers and boats and bombs should be put on hold until the system I have in mind is up and running.
The 3 Bs won't save lives in the short term and a surveillance system will and could be used repeatedly for similar problems. Drug dealers in the jungles - tracked. Illegal immigrants at the border - tracked. Terrorists the world over - tracked. Historical sites being pillaged by tomb robbers - tracked.
Why isn’t' the media all over this? Because they don't want to actually help solve a problem, they need problems to stay in business.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Cable Companies
When I hooked up the VCR/DVD combo I carefully considered the order that my machines needed to go in. I have the VCR/DVD box, the Cable Box and the TV. After contemplating this I decided that the cable should go into the VCR/DVD, out to the Cable Box and then to the TV. This would allow the VCR to independently set stations as opposed to being locked into what the Cable Box was set at.
I hooked everything up and it worked as desired.
It was months before I tried to use the On Demand feature of our Digital cable - a waste of money if I ever saw one, more on that later. For some reason it just wouldn't work so I called the cable company and after trying a few things they sent out a technician. Lo and Behold the problem was how I wired the boxes. The Cable Box has to be first, the VCR is a slave to the cable box making it virtually useless for recording shows.
This got me thinking - I constantly see adds for the cable company provided DVR. By setting up their technology to require my VCR be a slave to their box they are attempting to force me to use their DVR. I could get around this by hooking up a VCR to a different cable outlet or what not but that means more equipment that I have to buy and maintain. Why shouldn't I pay the cable company more money for a DVR they ask?
Like all companies, cable companies want to make more money off their customers. Since they can't hit up the world for a buck like the oil companies they have to siphon it from their limited pool in the US. The first step in this is Digital cable. I don't need digital cable, the old one was just fine. The only thing I use on digital cable is the program guide feature. In a year I have used on demand once and have no desire to do so again. I rarely see any station above the on demand stuff which starts around 100. Scrolling through 1 to 100 even with the gaps (I think there are some but am not really sure) takes a long time. Getting through the on demands stuff is ridiculous. If you are a station after the 100's on Time Warner you should be complaining REALLY loud. There is plenty of garbage in the 100's you could replace, feel free to contact me and I will tell you which stations can go.
I am addicted to the program guide. When that thing isn't working I am like a lost puppy. I don't know how I ever survived before the guide. For some reason I frequently lose my guide and it says NO DATA. When this happens I freak out. A few times this occurred and then it corrected itself and I was relieved. Then one day it went out and was gone for 2 or 3 days straight. It was then that I overcame my inertia (we discussed that previously) and called the cable company. They said they had done an upgrade and I needed to unplug my box and they would send a signal and correct it. It worked, thank goodness.
I doubt I am the only addict to this feature, how many customers were having apoplexy until they called and got it fixed?
It went out again yesterday. Based on prior experience, that one call, I unplugged the box and started it up again. Sure enough, the guide was back. Life was good once more.
So now the cable company wants to bump my bill again with a DVR or with a premium channel package or with a digital telephone (the telephone company wants to do the same in reverse). I already spend around $100/month for my digital cable and internet access. If they think I want to pay them more they are mistaken. I find the cost for their service to already be excessive and seriously wish I could once again overcome my inertia and set up a website from my home computer that ate up bandwidth to make sure I get my moneys worth out of them.
Just to make matters worse, I own stock in the darn company that provides my cable service. I get really mad everytime I have a problem and remember that fact. Every upset customer is costing my stock value.
I hooked everything up and it worked as desired.
It was months before I tried to use the On Demand feature of our Digital cable - a waste of money if I ever saw one, more on that later. For some reason it just wouldn't work so I called the cable company and after trying a few things they sent out a technician. Lo and Behold the problem was how I wired the boxes. The Cable Box has to be first, the VCR is a slave to the cable box making it virtually useless for recording shows.
This got me thinking - I constantly see adds for the cable company provided DVR. By setting up their technology to require my VCR be a slave to their box they are attempting to force me to use their DVR. I could get around this by hooking up a VCR to a different cable outlet or what not but that means more equipment that I have to buy and maintain. Why shouldn't I pay the cable company more money for a DVR they ask?
Like all companies, cable companies want to make more money off their customers. Since they can't hit up the world for a buck like the oil companies they have to siphon it from their limited pool in the US. The first step in this is Digital cable. I don't need digital cable, the old one was just fine. The only thing I use on digital cable is the program guide feature. In a year I have used on demand once and have no desire to do so again. I rarely see any station above the on demand stuff which starts around 100. Scrolling through 1 to 100 even with the gaps (I think there are some but am not really sure) takes a long time. Getting through the on demands stuff is ridiculous. If you are a station after the 100's on Time Warner you should be complaining REALLY loud. There is plenty of garbage in the 100's you could replace, feel free to contact me and I will tell you which stations can go.
I am addicted to the program guide. When that thing isn't working I am like a lost puppy. I don't know how I ever survived before the guide. For some reason I frequently lose my guide and it says NO DATA. When this happens I freak out. A few times this occurred and then it corrected itself and I was relieved. Then one day it went out and was gone for 2 or 3 days straight. It was then that I overcame my inertia (we discussed that previously) and called the cable company. They said they had done an upgrade and I needed to unplug my box and they would send a signal and correct it. It worked, thank goodness.
I doubt I am the only addict to this feature, how many customers were having apoplexy until they called and got it fixed?
It went out again yesterday. Based on prior experience, that one call, I unplugged the box and started it up again. Sure enough, the guide was back. Life was good once more.
So now the cable company wants to bump my bill again with a DVR or with a premium channel package or with a digital telephone (the telephone company wants to do the same in reverse). I already spend around $100/month for my digital cable and internet access. If they think I want to pay them more they are mistaken. I find the cost for their service to already be excessive and seriously wish I could once again overcome my inertia and set up a website from my home computer that ate up bandwidth to make sure I get my moneys worth out of them.
Just to make matters worse, I own stock in the darn company that provides my cable service. I get really mad everytime I have a problem and remember that fact. Every upset customer is costing my stock value.
DVD Recorders....are crap
If you haven't already guessed, I do a fair amount of reading. Another article that caught my eye had to do with DVD Recorders and how everyone in the industry had been expecting them to replace VCRs and what not for the past two years and are expecting the same this year.
I bought a DVD recorder/VCR combo last year. It said something like, "Simple One Button Copying from VCR to DVD". I thought that was great since we have a few video tapes we wanted to copy and preserve.
Would you believe that my wife has a videtape of herself, on stage, singing with Barry Manilow at an old concert? She was the one called from the audience to join him for a song. She considers this item priceless and wants it copied and preserved forever. But I digress.
So I gave my wife this wonderful DVD/VCR for Christmas and replaced the old VCR and the old DVD - woo hoo, 2 boxes gone only 1 added, progress. I then pulled out the manual and started reading how to copy from VCR to DVD. Now, if I have to read about this then it is not one button copying. After trudging through several steps, most of which made no sense to me and must have still been written and Japanese or something, I decided to just give it a try. All those speed settings and what not would hopefully default correctly.
I put in the tape, put in the blank DVD and hit a bunch of buttons, not one mind you, a bunch. Soon the machine was whirring and out spit a DVD. How exciting. I put the DVD back in and played it, miracle of miracles, the video was playing from the DVD - SUCCESS.
Then a time came when my wife was going to see a friend. She wanted a tape of the two of them skydiving copied so she could take one with her. I once again managed to copy the video and all was good in the land.
When my wife and her friend put the DVD in her friends player.....nothing. The DVD said the disc was blank! I quickly took my DVD of Barry M. and tried playing it on my new Dell computer (the other piece of technological trash), nothing. Back into the DVD player, it played. how could that be? I still have no friggin clue.
Why don't folks buy DVD Recorders in place of VCRs? Because they are still too complex and don't work for crap. My wife hates the machine because it is too complex to figure out how to tell it when to record a show in the future which you can't really do now thank to the cable company........what a lead in for tomorrow.
I bought a DVD recorder/VCR combo last year. It said something like, "Simple One Button Copying from VCR to DVD". I thought that was great since we have a few video tapes we wanted to copy and preserve.
Would you believe that my wife has a videtape of herself, on stage, singing with Barry Manilow at an old concert? She was the one called from the audience to join him for a song. She considers this item priceless and wants it copied and preserved forever. But I digress.
So I gave my wife this wonderful DVD/VCR for Christmas and replaced the old VCR and the old DVD - woo hoo, 2 boxes gone only 1 added, progress. I then pulled out the manual and started reading how to copy from VCR to DVD. Now, if I have to read about this then it is not one button copying. After trudging through several steps, most of which made no sense to me and must have still been written and Japanese or something, I decided to just give it a try. All those speed settings and what not would hopefully default correctly.
I put in the tape, put in the blank DVD and hit a bunch of buttons, not one mind you, a bunch. Soon the machine was whirring and out spit a DVD. How exciting. I put the DVD back in and played it, miracle of miracles, the video was playing from the DVD - SUCCESS.
Then a time came when my wife was going to see a friend. She wanted a tape of the two of them skydiving copied so she could take one with her. I once again managed to copy the video and all was good in the land.
When my wife and her friend put the DVD in her friends player.....nothing. The DVD said the disc was blank! I quickly took my DVD of Barry M. and tried playing it on my new Dell computer (the other piece of technological trash), nothing. Back into the DVD player, it played. how could that be? I still have no friggin clue.
Why don't folks buy DVD Recorders in place of VCRs? Because they are still too complex and don't work for crap. My wife hates the machine because it is too complex to figure out how to tell it when to record a show in the future which you can't really do now thank to the cable company........what a lead in for tomorrow.
Monday, November 28, 2005
Justice in Florida?
How many of you saw the school teacher (age 25) who plead guilty to having sex with a student (age 14) and received probation?
Are you kidding me? A woman whose lawyer described her as 'too pretty' to go to jail has sex with a child and gets off with probation and filing as a sex offender. If that had been a man with a young girl he would have been dragged to the town center and strung up from the nearest tree.
Everyone who agreed to this settlement should be fired.
Where are her neighbors in all of this? Everytime I hear of a pedophile getting out of jail the neighbors where they will be living are up in arms, carrying torches and demanding that the person spend eternity in jail and never be released to endanger their children. This lady never went to jail and never had counseling so she MUST be a significant risk of repeating her sin. Why isn't she being run out of town?
Oh well, I guess she was having sex with a boy and that is what boys are supposed to be doing and girls are supposed to be saying 'No' so it wasn't that bad was it. Bullshit, do the crime, do the time!!!
Are you kidding me? A woman whose lawyer described her as 'too pretty' to go to jail has sex with a child and gets off with probation and filing as a sex offender. If that had been a man with a young girl he would have been dragged to the town center and strung up from the nearest tree.
Everyone who agreed to this settlement should be fired.
Where are her neighbors in all of this? Everytime I hear of a pedophile getting out of jail the neighbors where they will be living are up in arms, carrying torches and demanding that the person spend eternity in jail and never be released to endanger their children. This lady never went to jail and never had counseling so she MUST be a significant risk of repeating her sin. Why isn't she being run out of town?
Oh well, I guess she was having sex with a boy and that is what boys are supposed to be doing and girls are supposed to be saying 'No' so it wasn't that bad was it. Bullshit, do the crime, do the time!!!
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Norton Security Products
I have Norton Internet Security, Norton Anti-Virus and whatever came in the package I bought. I activated the auto update feature and life was good.
Last week a weird thing happened - I received a notice of an update. I never had this occur, it just happened in the past. This one required that I restart my computer. That should have been a big ole red flag.
I downloaded the update it installed and the computer relaunched itself.
As I am prone to do I opened Internet Explorer and Outlook. Both had errors reaching the internet. Hmm.
I rebooted the machine again and soon Explorer was working - not Outlook. For a few days I put up with this and used an internet tool to read my email. See my post from a few days ago on inertia to understand why I did this. One morning I finally decided to call Norton and figure out the issue.
Finding a phone number to call Norton proved to be an ordeal in itself. Internet companies have come to learn that if they post a number everyone will call so they bury it if they put it on a website at all. I finally located a number and called in. I then put up with the assanine system where you choose this or that option - none of which seem to deal with the issue you are calling for. Eventually I just started hitting numbers and finally got a real person.
This persons name was Mark, not! I had reached an Indian call center and having dealt with Indian outsourcing I can assure you that not one of them has an anglicized name like Mark. Mark asks me my problem and says that I should try deactivating the program and then reactivating which has solved this issue previously. Apparently their database on issues is pretty good as he was quick with this bit - or it is a major issue they should look into.
This failed to make a difference. Next we disabled the Internet security app and suddenly email worked. Mark said the issue was clearly with Norton and that he would send me an email detailing what to do to fix it. Great.
I get my email from Mark and it says that I should call their Service Representatives....What was Mark?
My computer still isn't working - I disable the Internet security every time I open email and then shut down email when it is done so I don't get the error as security kicks back in after 5 minutes or so. Inertia.
Now I have received a notice that I am not protected from some devastating problem and I need to be!!!!! or so they say. The auto update runs and doesn't work. It says I should manually run it - huh, if it doesn't work what does manual change?
I try to run it and get a message saying it is running in the background already and I have to wait for it to finish. I get this for about an hour before I decide to launch this application and see if I can shut the process down. Long story short - it is still running and now my Norton is completely screwed up. I don't know if it is all running or just parts of it. The internet part is still running as email still doesn't work correctly.
I guess I am going to have to bite the bullet and make another call to Norton. I wish there were a way for me to contact the Chairman of the company and have him (guessing at the sex but how many are female? Hint, you don't need your toes to count them and you should require a lot more then that) call the help desk and resolve my problem. Then he could understand my frustration and take some real action to correct it. Meanwhile I am left with a new computer that doesn't work properly and is likely wide open to attack by hackers - go for it folks, break in and steal everything. Screaming at Mark or some other poor hack who is paid peanuts to use some psuedonym isn't going to help me.
Last week a weird thing happened - I received a notice of an update. I never had this occur, it just happened in the past. This one required that I restart my computer. That should have been a big ole red flag.
I downloaded the update it installed and the computer relaunched itself.
As I am prone to do I opened Internet Explorer and Outlook. Both had errors reaching the internet. Hmm.
I rebooted the machine again and soon Explorer was working - not Outlook. For a few days I put up with this and used an internet tool to read my email. See my post from a few days ago on inertia to understand why I did this. One morning I finally decided to call Norton and figure out the issue.
Finding a phone number to call Norton proved to be an ordeal in itself. Internet companies have come to learn that if they post a number everyone will call so they bury it if they put it on a website at all. I finally located a number and called in. I then put up with the assanine system where you choose this or that option - none of which seem to deal with the issue you are calling for. Eventually I just started hitting numbers and finally got a real person.
This persons name was Mark, not! I had reached an Indian call center and having dealt with Indian outsourcing I can assure you that not one of them has an anglicized name like Mark. Mark asks me my problem and says that I should try deactivating the program and then reactivating which has solved this issue previously. Apparently their database on issues is pretty good as he was quick with this bit - or it is a major issue they should look into.
This failed to make a difference. Next we disabled the Internet security app and suddenly email worked. Mark said the issue was clearly with Norton and that he would send me an email detailing what to do to fix it. Great.
I get my email from Mark and it says that I should call their Service Representatives....What was Mark?
My computer still isn't working - I disable the Internet security every time I open email and then shut down email when it is done so I don't get the error as security kicks back in after 5 minutes or so. Inertia.
Now I have received a notice that I am not protected from some devastating problem and I need to be!!!!! or so they say. The auto update runs and doesn't work. It says I should manually run it - huh, if it doesn't work what does manual change?
I try to run it and get a message saying it is running in the background already and I have to wait for it to finish. I get this for about an hour before I decide to launch this application and see if I can shut the process down. Long story short - it is still running and now my Norton is completely screwed up. I don't know if it is all running or just parts of it. The internet part is still running as email still doesn't work correctly.
I guess I am going to have to bite the bullet and make another call to Norton. I wish there were a way for me to contact the Chairman of the company and have him (guessing at the sex but how many are female? Hint, you don't need your toes to count them and you should require a lot more then that) call the help desk and resolve my problem. Then he could understand my frustration and take some real action to correct it. Meanwhile I am left with a new computer that doesn't work properly and is likely wide open to attack by hackers - go for it folks, break in and steal everything. Screaming at Mark or some other poor hack who is paid peanuts to use some psuedonym isn't going to help me.
Internet Advertising
Is it just me or does insanity still rule the internet and internet advertising?
The other day the Wall Street Journal ran a story on a kid who decided to try paying for his college education by selling advertising space on a website. This site is just a page he put up with nothing but ads on it. Despite this he has sold a significant amount of ad space. It was theorized that the uniqueness of what he was doing helped not ot mention the fact he was mentioned in lots of blogs (by himself to start) and then in the media (note the WSJ article).
This reminds me of the person who asked everyone to send him a penny to help defray college costs and people did. Once started it fed on itself and the media promoted it and folks sent 1 cent in an envelope with a 32 cent stamp (or whatever the cost at the time).
I forget the specifics but the latest kid has already made over $40,000 (or maybe that was in Euros). Companies can't possibly believe they will get their moneys worth out of this endeavour. The attention will fade and the website will join others (like this one) in obscurity. If you are an investor in a firm that bought space on this kids site you should sell your stock- FAST. On the other hand I have to take my hat off to the kid who thought of it and actually pulled it off. He is laughing all the way to the bank. P.T. Barnum would be proud.
Switching mediums - how many of you click on banner advertisments on websites? I can't remember the last time I did this. I can't remember EVER clicking on one of the paid listings on the search engines. Despite my habits someone must be clicking on these links or Google wouldn't be earning a dime in revenue which is clearly not true.
I even signed up for the banner ad program on the blog just in case someone actually reads this - why pass up free money.
I suppose this is yet another opportunity that I have failed to capitalize on.
Even though I don't use the ads, I do purchase products on the internet fairly regularly. I must admit that the simpler the product the better - my experiences with Dell have been less then stellar. They best hope I am the aberation. Then there are the Norton Security products.......
The other day the Wall Street Journal ran a story on a kid who decided to try paying for his college education by selling advertising space on a website. This site is just a page he put up with nothing but ads on it. Despite this he has sold a significant amount of ad space. It was theorized that the uniqueness of what he was doing helped not ot mention the fact he was mentioned in lots of blogs (by himself to start) and then in the media (note the WSJ article).
This reminds me of the person who asked everyone to send him a penny to help defray college costs and people did. Once started it fed on itself and the media promoted it and folks sent 1 cent in an envelope with a 32 cent stamp (or whatever the cost at the time).
I forget the specifics but the latest kid has already made over $40,000 (or maybe that was in Euros). Companies can't possibly believe they will get their moneys worth out of this endeavour. The attention will fade and the website will join others (like this one) in obscurity. If you are an investor in a firm that bought space on this kids site you should sell your stock- FAST. On the other hand I have to take my hat off to the kid who thought of it and actually pulled it off. He is laughing all the way to the bank. P.T. Barnum would be proud.
Switching mediums - how many of you click on banner advertisments on websites? I can't remember the last time I did this. I can't remember EVER clicking on one of the paid listings on the search engines. Despite my habits someone must be clicking on these links or Google wouldn't be earning a dime in revenue which is clearly not true.
I even signed up for the banner ad program on the blog just in case someone actually reads this - why pass up free money.
I suppose this is yet another opportunity that I have failed to capitalize on.
Even though I don't use the ads, I do purchase products on the internet fairly regularly. I must admit that the simpler the product the better - my experiences with Dell have been less then stellar. They best hope I am the aberation. Then there are the Norton Security products.......
Costco
Yesterday my wife went to Costco to pick up some holiday supplies. As she was checking out and her bill reached the stratosphere the customer service staff suddenly come running over to her checkout. Our total purchases in the past 12 months had exceeded $2,500 or some other magical number in that neighborhood. What this meant was that if we were in the EXECUTIVE membership level we could make more in a 2% rebate then it cost to raise our memebership level. WE were missing a golden opportunity.
Isn't technology an amazing thing. Their customer information system was able to tell them in real time that my wife was at checkout # X and that her spending had hit THE threshhold.
Well, my wife was a bit mystified by all this sudden attention. She understood what they were saying but she just wanted to buy her holiday stuff and get out of there. The service folks really wanted her to sign up and spend the extra $55 to upgrade our membership (prorated for the time left on the current membership). The customers in line behind my wife were none to happy either, they all just wanted out of there.
My wife passed on this generous opportunity by saying she had to speak with me. Being the analytical sort that I am I started considering the benefit. It turns out that we just barely spent the magical amount in the last 12 months. Our membership was JUST renewed. Our spending has been higher then ever before due to our woderful daughter and all those expensive diapers and formula cans. Will we spend enough to justify the extra cost?
If I knew that I was planning on purchasing something large there I would jump on it but my greatest fear is really that of future inertia. Many of you have probably joined a gym in the past. Most if not all of you have gone for a while and then slowly drifted away. Meanwhile your credit card/bank account keeps getting dinged for the monthly memebership fee. Eventually you cancel the membership but in the meantime you have paid a lot of money for nothing simply because inertia kept you from calling and cancelling the charge. I fear the same thing with Costco. I know that once I sign up for the Executive level they will keep sending me annual renewals for Executive. I bet they will even try to get me to set up some automatic renewal plan like everyone else who counts on inertia. Once my spending drops I am sure the customer service folks won't come running over to suggest I reduce my membership and save myself $55.
And that gym example - although I have been guilty of this to slight extent (a few months only) my wife has been a member of 24 Hour Fitness since before it was 24 Hour Fitness. I have known my wife for around 4 years and she has NEVER gone to the gym - EVER. She keeps saying the membership fee is ONLY $8/month or something considered dirt cheap these days so if she gives it up she will never get it back. Meanwhile we are out $400 for nothing and 24 Hour Fitness has never called to ask about her lack of attendance. Actually, just the opposite, they have no clue she is a member and keep trying to get her to sign up like a new member.
I did keep a dial up internet service once for a long time without ever using it. I kept saying it was backup for my cable connection and for when I was travelling for work. It didn't matter, it was unused for around 2 years before I finally bit the bullet and cancelled it. The customer service rep tried to get me to keep it even though she had to have known I NEVER dialed in. If she didn't know then I would have to wonder why Costco has such a superior customer information system then a tech company?
Isn't technology an amazing thing. Their customer information system was able to tell them in real time that my wife was at checkout # X and that her spending had hit THE threshhold.
Well, my wife was a bit mystified by all this sudden attention. She understood what they were saying but she just wanted to buy her holiday stuff and get out of there. The service folks really wanted her to sign up and spend the extra $55 to upgrade our membership (prorated for the time left on the current membership). The customers in line behind my wife were none to happy either, they all just wanted out of there.
My wife passed on this generous opportunity by saying she had to speak with me. Being the analytical sort that I am I started considering the benefit. It turns out that we just barely spent the magical amount in the last 12 months. Our membership was JUST renewed. Our spending has been higher then ever before due to our woderful daughter and all those expensive diapers and formula cans. Will we spend enough to justify the extra cost?
If I knew that I was planning on purchasing something large there I would jump on it but my greatest fear is really that of future inertia. Many of you have probably joined a gym in the past. Most if not all of you have gone for a while and then slowly drifted away. Meanwhile your credit card/bank account keeps getting dinged for the monthly memebership fee. Eventually you cancel the membership but in the meantime you have paid a lot of money for nothing simply because inertia kept you from calling and cancelling the charge. I fear the same thing with Costco. I know that once I sign up for the Executive level they will keep sending me annual renewals for Executive. I bet they will even try to get me to set up some automatic renewal plan like everyone else who counts on inertia. Once my spending drops I am sure the customer service folks won't come running over to suggest I reduce my membership and save myself $55.
And that gym example - although I have been guilty of this to slight extent (a few months only) my wife has been a member of 24 Hour Fitness since before it was 24 Hour Fitness. I have known my wife for around 4 years and she has NEVER gone to the gym - EVER. She keeps saying the membership fee is ONLY $8/month or something considered dirt cheap these days so if she gives it up she will never get it back. Meanwhile we are out $400 for nothing and 24 Hour Fitness has never called to ask about her lack of attendance. Actually, just the opposite, they have no clue she is a member and keep trying to get her to sign up like a new member.
I did keep a dial up internet service once for a long time without ever using it. I kept saying it was backup for my cable connection and for when I was travelling for work. It didn't matter, it was unused for around 2 years before I finally bit the bullet and cancelled it. The customer service rep tried to get me to keep it even though she had to have known I NEVER dialed in. If she didn't know then I would have to wonder why Costco has such a superior customer information system then a tech company?
Monday, November 14, 2005
Advertising and Liars
I spent this weekend thinking of topics I wished to expound upon and here I sit, wondering what they all were. On Friday I mentioned advertising and TV Commercials. I have always found TV commercials to be interesting for a number of reasons. I don't think one of them is trying to decide what to purchase but I am sure they have their impact.
Recently those of us in the US went through an election. Elections are always good for terrible advertising. Living in California I was treated to a series of referendum questions that generated ads both for and against. Personally, I feel the ads and went well beyond the legal boundaries but so far no one has been charged, I bet the AG is afraid he will be accused of taking sides in the political battles so it is hands off.
My personal favorite this go round was the redistricting plan. The foes of this plan (read as 'entrenched politicians who don't want to have to get real jobs') portrayed it as giving 3 former judges absolute power to rule the world. Cross them and you would end up in a deep pit with 500 others who dared challange them. Now I haven't been in California too long so I don't know just how bad drawing up the district lines really is but I did see this process in another state and there it was appaling. The politicains would look at a map that depicted concentrations of registered voters by party and pick the areas that would support them and strung them together so they wouldn't be voted out in the next election. I personally felt districts should be look more like a block then a snake all stretched out and bent in odd direction that just ate a couple baby rabbits . I know that ensuring equal numbers of voters in districts makes my simple image impossible and will require that towns be split but simplicity should still be the rule.
I guess that isn't about advertising as much as my disdain for old school politics. Back to the ads, the anti-ads were down right decpetive if not plain old fashioned lies. Yet the politicians got away with it. I read where a campaign in souther California went so far as to put out fliers in the last few days stating that if they OKed a local referendum they would be OKing the eminent domain seizure of their land. This was clearly a blatant lie as one had nothing to do with the other. Shouldn't the perpetrators of these lies and deceptions be held to the same accountability as corporate America? Where is the FCC and local authorities to correct these injustices? Oh yeah, they are part of and sometimes the very politicians putting out the deceptive ads and lies. Seems the loonies are in charge of the asylum Martha.
So far you must be assuming I don't like politicians, actually, I think I would be a great politician and could rise up above this stench and do great deeds while riding my white charger into battle. Of course every politician starts out saying just that don't they?
Back to advertising. Corporate America isn't really guilty of outright lies. Deception is the name of the game, they just try to keep it subtle. When it comes to product ads I find some amusing, like Jack in the Box. The funny adds in this series are too numerous to mention but the Chipotle add was great and the recent one poking fun at celebrity poker has a nice twist with Gary Coleman. If you can't laugh at yourself who can you laugh at?
What I can't understand i how some corporate advertisers allow the ads we see to get made AND aired publically. I picture the ad exec selling some concept and the managers thinking it sounds cool. The ad exec goes out and gets the commercial shot and then shows it to the managers. Don't they realize just how bad the ad is? Are they afraid that after having spent the money making the commercial they will lose their jobs if they can it?
Unfortunately I am drawing a blank on most terrible commercials right now. The only one that comes to mind is Mentos - I will NEVER EVER buy Mentos as long as I live. The commercials are so bad that I have to change the channel when they come on. That just reminded me, I also change the channel when ads for the Kellogs somethin somethin Krunch come on. At first the concept of the guy sitting their eating his crunchy cereal while the boss tried to fire him was cute. Now it is downright annoying. That might be the best cereal in the world but I will never know because the advertising has driven me away. I am still wondering how those ads got made, shouldn't the ad exec being sitting at his big ole desk eating the cereal non-stop from now until the firm crumbles around him because he stopped doing his real work and couldn't hear the phone ring when new customers tried calling?
I need to end this tirade as I am now worked up and need to use the punching bag.
Recently those of us in the US went through an election. Elections are always good for terrible advertising. Living in California I was treated to a series of referendum questions that generated ads both for and against. Personally, I feel the ads and went well beyond the legal boundaries but so far no one has been charged, I bet the AG is afraid he will be accused of taking sides in the political battles so it is hands off.
My personal favorite this go round was the redistricting plan. The foes of this plan (read as 'entrenched politicians who don't want to have to get real jobs') portrayed it as giving 3 former judges absolute power to rule the world. Cross them and you would end up in a deep pit with 500 others who dared challange them. Now I haven't been in California too long so I don't know just how bad drawing up the district lines really is but I did see this process in another state and there it was appaling. The politicains would look at a map that depicted concentrations of registered voters by party and pick the areas that would support them and strung them together so they wouldn't be voted out in the next election. I personally felt districts should be look more like a block then a snake all stretched out and bent in odd direction that just ate a couple baby rabbits . I know that ensuring equal numbers of voters in districts makes my simple image impossible and will require that towns be split but simplicity should still be the rule.
I guess that isn't about advertising as much as my disdain for old school politics. Back to the ads, the anti-ads were down right decpetive if not plain old fashioned lies. Yet the politicians got away with it. I read where a campaign in souther California went so far as to put out fliers in the last few days stating that if they OKed a local referendum they would be OKing the eminent domain seizure of their land. This was clearly a blatant lie as one had nothing to do with the other. Shouldn't the perpetrators of these lies and deceptions be held to the same accountability as corporate America? Where is the FCC and local authorities to correct these injustices? Oh yeah, they are part of and sometimes the very politicians putting out the deceptive ads and lies. Seems the loonies are in charge of the asylum Martha.
So far you must be assuming I don't like politicians, actually, I think I would be a great politician and could rise up above this stench and do great deeds while riding my white charger into battle. Of course every politician starts out saying just that don't they?
Back to advertising. Corporate America isn't really guilty of outright lies. Deception is the name of the game, they just try to keep it subtle. When it comes to product ads I find some amusing, like Jack in the Box. The funny adds in this series are too numerous to mention but the Chipotle add was great and the recent one poking fun at celebrity poker has a nice twist with Gary Coleman. If you can't laugh at yourself who can you laugh at?
What I can't understand i how some corporate advertisers allow the ads we see to get made AND aired publically. I picture the ad exec selling some concept and the managers thinking it sounds cool. The ad exec goes out and gets the commercial shot and then shows it to the managers. Don't they realize just how bad the ad is? Are they afraid that after having spent the money making the commercial they will lose their jobs if they can it?
Unfortunately I am drawing a blank on most terrible commercials right now. The only one that comes to mind is Mentos - I will NEVER EVER buy Mentos as long as I live. The commercials are so bad that I have to change the channel when they come on. That just reminded me, I also change the channel when ads for the Kellogs somethin somethin Krunch come on. At first the concept of the guy sitting their eating his crunchy cereal while the boss tried to fire him was cute. Now it is downright annoying. That might be the best cereal in the world but I will never know because the advertising has driven me away. I am still wondering how those ads got made, shouldn't the ad exec being sitting at his big ole desk eating the cereal non-stop from now until the firm crumbles around him because he stopped doing his real work and couldn't hear the phone ring when new customers tried calling?
I need to end this tirade as I am now worked up and need to use the punching bag.
Friday, November 11, 2005
Decision Angst
Yesterday I explained why UPromise had lost a lot of it's shine for me lately. Part of that discussion involved how my decision to stop using the UPromise Credit Card caused me continuing angst.
Imagine my surprise while reading the Oct. 17th issue of Forbes magazine, during my flight home, you wouldn't believe how much reading an airplane ride can allow one to catch up on, I find an article detailing how Economic theory has a new area called Behavioral Economics. It takes the theory that we humans always act rationally unfettered by emotion or impulse and adds in the fetters.
Having once studied economics I was familiar with this theory and it was at the root of why I questioned my angst regarding the credit card decision. Suddenly, allowing for emotion I was allowed to have this angst. It is allowed if not expected.
The article went into some detail on expiraments they were conducting and how by putting an attractive female on an ad mailer the response rate skyrocketed when compared to cutting the interest rate 4 % pts on the same mailer. This immediately had me thinking of TV commercials (also mentioned in the article, can't claim any genius on this breakthrough) and especially the one for the firm that will sell your TimeShare. Darned if I remember who that company is since I don't own a time share nor intend to pick one up in the near future. What I do remember is that the very first image in the ad is a sexy, blonde female laying on a float in a pool in a tiny bikini. I had mentioned this ad to my wife in the past with the perplexing question of, "What does that lady have to do with selling my timeshare? Do they promise that in the pool of what ever time share I buy? Do I get that in my pool if they sell my timeshare?" As an expirament I should purchase and then sell my timeshare and figure out where this lady comes into the picture.
This transitions nicely into my issues with advertising, especially TV ads. Tomorrow we discuss what I like and what I don't like. Having just gone through an election there is plenty of fodder.
Imagine my surprise while reading the Oct. 17th issue of Forbes magazine, during my flight home, you wouldn't believe how much reading an airplane ride can allow one to catch up on, I find an article detailing how Economic theory has a new area called Behavioral Economics. It takes the theory that we humans always act rationally unfettered by emotion or impulse and adds in the fetters.
Having once studied economics I was familiar with this theory and it was at the root of why I questioned my angst regarding the credit card decision. Suddenly, allowing for emotion I was allowed to have this angst. It is allowed if not expected.
The article went into some detail on expiraments they were conducting and how by putting an attractive female on an ad mailer the response rate skyrocketed when compared to cutting the interest rate 4 % pts on the same mailer. This immediately had me thinking of TV commercials (also mentioned in the article, can't claim any genius on this breakthrough) and especially the one for the firm that will sell your TimeShare. Darned if I remember who that company is since I don't own a time share nor intend to pick one up in the near future. What I do remember is that the very first image in the ad is a sexy, blonde female laying on a float in a pool in a tiny bikini. I had mentioned this ad to my wife in the past with the perplexing question of, "What does that lady have to do with selling my timeshare? Do they promise that in the pool of what ever time share I buy? Do I get that in my pool if they sell my timeshare?" As an expirament I should purchase and then sell my timeshare and figure out where this lady comes into the picture.
This transitions nicely into my issues with advertising, especially TV ads. Tomorrow we discuss what I like and what I don't like. Having just gone through an election there is plenty of fodder.
Thursday, November 10, 2005
As promised....UPromise...
I recently had a baby girl which prompted me to consider college and how to save money for it. I decided to give the UPromise plan a try. For those unfamiliar, Upromise is a program where you receive credit in a UPromise account for purchasing items from various merchants which can be used for education expenses. I juiced my account by signing up for the UPromise credit card which gives you 1% of all purchases back as a credit to your account.
After several months my account reached a balance of $200+. When I checked my balance, usually after my monthly update email, it would be suggested I open a 529 savings plan and deposit my money there so that it could grow. Otherwise it sits in a zero interest account with UPromise.
I read the first page of information and clicked more info. I read the second page of information and clicked more info. On the 3rd page of information I was finally informed that UPromise would charge an annual fee of $20 for my 529 account starting 12 months after it was opened.
Doing some quick math in my head I realized that I would need to earn around 10% annually on my $200 just to cover the $20 fee. Given my investing track record and my love of mutual funds I don't see this happening. If I opened this account, over time I would hand all of my UPromise money to UPromise. How will this help pay for college?
Now my trust in UPromise was starting to crack so I began considering the rest of the program. Most of my money has come from the Credit Card kickback. I have several credit cards including airline miles and points redeemable for overpriced merchandise or cash. Assuming I don't jump the gun, the cash rebate is 1%. So which is better, the UPromise card which puts money aside for future schooling needs or the straight cash back?
I can see some situations where people who find it hard to save money would like the UPromise program as they can't really touch the money so there will be something when the time comes for education. I personally don't have that problem so rationally I am better off getting 1% back in Cash which I can then choose to spend or save in any manner I desire - including putting into an account for education that doesn't charge me the $20 service fee. Despite the clear logic of this I still feel 'wrong' about it, the mind is a tricky thing.
Where does this leave me with UPromise? The rebates for purchasing specific items are miniscule but free if they are items that you would normally purchase so we refer to the old adage about beggers not being choosers. I will continue to make my purchases as I always have and will earn a few cents every month, perhaps even a whole dollar a year. In 18 years when I have to pay for college I will use the $217 but until then I won't be paying UPromise $20/year for a 529 account and my usage of the UPromise Credit Card will dry up. I better check on annual fees, if the card has one I will cancel it.
Sorry Upromise. You have a wonderful idea but you just aren't able to make it worth the effort of using your service.
After several months my account reached a balance of $200+. When I checked my balance, usually after my monthly update email, it would be suggested I open a 529 savings plan and deposit my money there so that it could grow. Otherwise it sits in a zero interest account with UPromise.
I read the first page of information and clicked more info. I read the second page of information and clicked more info. On the 3rd page of information I was finally informed that UPromise would charge an annual fee of $20 for my 529 account starting 12 months after it was opened.
Doing some quick math in my head I realized that I would need to earn around 10% annually on my $200 just to cover the $20 fee. Given my investing track record and my love of mutual funds I don't see this happening. If I opened this account, over time I would hand all of my UPromise money to UPromise. How will this help pay for college?
Now my trust in UPromise was starting to crack so I began considering the rest of the program. Most of my money has come from the Credit Card kickback. I have several credit cards including airline miles and points redeemable for overpriced merchandise or cash. Assuming I don't jump the gun, the cash rebate is 1%. So which is better, the UPromise card which puts money aside for future schooling needs or the straight cash back?
I can see some situations where people who find it hard to save money would like the UPromise program as they can't really touch the money so there will be something when the time comes for education. I personally don't have that problem so rationally I am better off getting 1% back in Cash which I can then choose to spend or save in any manner I desire - including putting into an account for education that doesn't charge me the $20 service fee. Despite the clear logic of this I still feel 'wrong' about it, the mind is a tricky thing.
Where does this leave me with UPromise? The rebates for purchasing specific items are miniscule but free if they are items that you would normally purchase so we refer to the old adage about beggers not being choosers. I will continue to make my purchases as I always have and will earn a few cents every month, perhaps even a whole dollar a year. In 18 years when I have to pay for college I will use the $217 but until then I won't be paying UPromise $20/year for a 529 account and my usage of the UPromise Credit Card will dry up. I better check on annual fees, if the card has one I will cancel it.
Sorry Upromise. You have a wonderful idea but you just aren't able to make it worth the effort of using your service.
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Mutual Funds and other ways to go broke
Now that I have this blog started the big question is what to write about next. Since this is only the second day I have a few topics to choose from. Give it a week and I will be wondering what I was thinking.
Today's thoughts go out to Mutual Funds and other investment accounts. Investment Advisors, Retirement Planners and other folks doling out financial advice love to recommend Mutual Funds. A mutual fund is a wonderful concept, you put your money into a pool with lots of other folks and someone is hired to do nothing but make investment decisions on where to invest this money. Supposedly you win because the decisions are made by a professional and with all that money the risk is spread out allowing you to avoid a single disasterous investment.
My personal experiences indicate that investing in mutual funds are a disasterous investment. I have roughly estimated that I need to save $3 million by the time I retire in order to have $1 million left in my retirement account. My best investment in a mutual fund was a money market account paying 2% annually, at least I didn't lose what I put into it.
So what is going wrong with mutual funds besides my tendency to pick losers? Expenses! Investment Advisors who manage mutual funds charge outrageous fees to manage the money when compared to the fees charged large institutional investors like pension funds or really rich individuals. Now I am strictly talking about the Management Fee charges and not the other expenses such as accounting and custody fees. Differences in these fees between types of accounts is generally explainable.
It is not uncommon for an equity mutual fund to be charged in the neighborhood of 1% of assets annually in management fees. An institutional account on the other hand frequently pays the same investment manager .3% of assets. The only explanation for the difference is that the pension fund owners drive a harder bargain, after all, if GM pays a lower management fee on it's pension fund then it doesn't have to come up with as much cash to fund the pension obligations and the company earns more money.
The Board of a Mutual Fund has no such desire. The members are handpicked by the mutual fund sponsor (another name for sponsor is investment manager) so even if they are considered independent they have no loyalty to the mutual fund investor. They don't have any bottom line to look after.
What I am curious about and will look into if I have the time is whether any of these board members also have responsibility for pension funds and if they are getting the same rates in the pension funds as the mutual funds they work for. I doubt it. Given the voracious appetites of lawyers in the US I can't imagine why they haven't started delving into this topic. Conflicts of interest, favoritism, all concepts that make politicaly motivated AGs and class action lawyers salivate. Companies get blackmailed, sorry, I mean sued when the stock price drops and for no other reason, my idea seems to have a much better foundation, doesn't it?
I will have to pick up on this topic tomorrow as my real job requires my attention. Tomorrow I will also pick on UPromise and their 529 College Savings Account.
Today's thoughts go out to Mutual Funds and other investment accounts. Investment Advisors, Retirement Planners and other folks doling out financial advice love to recommend Mutual Funds. A mutual fund is a wonderful concept, you put your money into a pool with lots of other folks and someone is hired to do nothing but make investment decisions on where to invest this money. Supposedly you win because the decisions are made by a professional and with all that money the risk is spread out allowing you to avoid a single disasterous investment.
My personal experiences indicate that investing in mutual funds are a disasterous investment. I have roughly estimated that I need to save $3 million by the time I retire in order to have $1 million left in my retirement account. My best investment in a mutual fund was a money market account paying 2% annually, at least I didn't lose what I put into it.
So what is going wrong with mutual funds besides my tendency to pick losers? Expenses! Investment Advisors who manage mutual funds charge outrageous fees to manage the money when compared to the fees charged large institutional investors like pension funds or really rich individuals. Now I am strictly talking about the Management Fee charges and not the other expenses such as accounting and custody fees. Differences in these fees between types of accounts is generally explainable.
It is not uncommon for an equity mutual fund to be charged in the neighborhood of 1% of assets annually in management fees. An institutional account on the other hand frequently pays the same investment manager .3% of assets. The only explanation for the difference is that the pension fund owners drive a harder bargain, after all, if GM pays a lower management fee on it's pension fund then it doesn't have to come up with as much cash to fund the pension obligations and the company earns more money.
The Board of a Mutual Fund has no such desire. The members are handpicked by the mutual fund sponsor (another name for sponsor is investment manager) so even if they are considered independent they have no loyalty to the mutual fund investor. They don't have any bottom line to look after.
What I am curious about and will look into if I have the time is whether any of these board members also have responsibility for pension funds and if they are getting the same rates in the pension funds as the mutual funds they work for. I doubt it. Given the voracious appetites of lawyers in the US I can't imagine why they haven't started delving into this topic. Conflicts of interest, favoritism, all concepts that make politicaly motivated AGs and class action lawyers salivate. Companies get blackmailed, sorry, I mean sued when the stock price drops and for no other reason, my idea seems to have a much better foundation, doesn't it?
I will have to pick up on this topic tomorrow as my real job requires my attention. Tomorrow I will also pick on UPromise and their 529 College Savings Account.
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
Daily Irritations and Other Thoughts
I decided to try my hand at this while wondering how to vent my frustration with those little things in life that I find irritating if not down right perplexing. Althought this didn't start recently I have to credit Charles Jaffe, a columnist at Marketwatch.com, with making me give this serious consideration. He wrote a column about how an oil firm that just reported BILLIONS of $$$$ in profit for the prior 3 months had been hounding him for a credit card payment after the check went astray during delivery. He had an avenue to vent his frustration and let the world know what he had experienced - I didn't. Not that I have a beef with any oil companies at this particular moment but it relates to many other firms that I do have relationships with.
I actually have a bit of envy for the oil companies. When I was a youngster I thought I would be RICH if I could come up with an idea that garnered me $1 from every American. (As with most Americans I had/have a very American centric view of the world that sometimes imposes limits.) I never came up with this idea but I was reminded of it when I saw that 2 of the big oil firms had earned $19 billion between them for the prior quarter of the year. That translates into their garnering $1 from every person on the planet for 3 months in a row. In reality they garnered a lot more since that was strictly profit but in my originally theory of getting rich that $1 was profit as well. This has truly expanded my horizons and made me realize I must think much bigger going forward.
I actually have a bit of envy for the oil companies. When I was a youngster I thought I would be RICH if I could come up with an idea that garnered me $1 from every American. (As with most Americans I had/have a very American centric view of the world that sometimes imposes limits.) I never came up with this idea but I was reminded of it when I saw that 2 of the big oil firms had earned $19 billion between them for the prior quarter of the year. That translates into their garnering $1 from every person on the planet for 3 months in a row. In reality they garnered a lot more since that was strictly profit but in my originally theory of getting rich that $1 was profit as well. This has truly expanded my horizons and made me realize I must think much bigger going forward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
