The Rant Guy Blog

HMV is Doomed

2011-07-30T10:41:00.002-04:00

I love stupid corporations...I really do...I shouldn't be amazed at this point, but I continue to admire the single minded folly of whomever runs HMV.

One of the bigger HMV locations just closed down here in Toronto and the only question anybody asked was "why did it last so long" or "the HMV was still there?"...and the reasons are obvious to anyone with an IQ over six.

HMV is a bastion if a dead world.

In the beginning the tech types were the first to abandon physical media. The rise if Limewire and Napster and finally Bittorrent meant that consumers were finally free to escape DRM hell...region codes and anti-piracy ads that couldn't be skipped became a thing of the past...the media world responded with ridiculous lawsuits, more DRM and making the consumer experience even worse for those who actually bought the stuff.

In the middle came everyone else...who bought ipods and downloaded from Itunes or realized that paying $27 for a movie that was available for $16 on Amazon was just throwing $10 in the garbage.

In the end, if you're wondering, an entire category of retail no longer exists in physical stores and isn't even an option.

HMV sat and watched the train coming...and sat...and sat...and sat...oh and did I mention they were sitting in the middle of the tracks?

Right now...Rango is $27 in store at HMV (they no longer have an online store)...Rango is $17 on Amazon...unless you need Rango NOW, what possible reason could there ever be to step foot in an HMV?

Consumers aren't what they used to be. Ten years ago you'd go to HMV because that's who sold DVD's. Today savvy consumers browse online to find the best deal and once they find that online is better, they will never ever return to your store. Ever.

HMV still has locations...but not for long...and nobody will miss it once they, too, disappear.

Sad state of RIM

2011-07-01T12:36:00.002-04:00

The other day an anonymous source claiming to be a high level executive wrote an open letter to RIM's top management detailing what he/she feels are the major problems with the company.

Predictably, RIM responded with a classic bit of PR that showcases pretty much exactly why RIM is a dying company.

It seems that modern PR is all about plugging holes versus making positive headway. Read the statement and tell me it's anything other than a "let's not make this controversy worse so we'll respond with completely generic PR blather that will certainly not impress anybody but won't offend anybody either".

Suffice to say, job well done!

RIM's response shows that a) they are somehow unable to respond to a detailed letter because the author is anonymous (hunh?) and b) don't have a single thing of substance to say in regards to any of the accusations (shocker).

Or put another way, RIM's stock has gone from $140 a share to under $30 in three years due to a very specific reason. RIM's products have no consumer traction and RIM is utterly unprepared to deal with the reality of Google, Microsoft and Apple in a consumer smartphone world.

Sure the blackberry dominates the business market (for now) but the consumer market? Who on earth would pick a blackberry over Android or Apple?

RIM's response is classic of a dying company. Employees afraid to speak, teams led by morons by virtue of company loyalty, clutching to existing product lines for a long as possible, utterly resistant to change.

I suspect RIM will cease to exist as a separate entity within 5 years...as the stock price plunges (and there is no product on the horizon that would change that fact)...the company will be bought out by somebody who wants to milk the blackberry business line to squeeze whatever value is left out of the system.

RIM is done.

Canada Post: Winners and Losers

2011-06-26T11:33:00.002-04:00

Canada Post's strike/lockout is about to end...who won? who lost?

Losers

NDP

The NDP come off looking like a fringe party who will support big labor to the death...except when they cave for no apparent reason.

I'd love to be in on the strategy meeting where the NDP said "let's stall the legislation as long as we can...up until the amendment phase when we'll let everything pass in quick votes and show that the filibustering we just did had no real impact other than to delay the mail that the public wants...and show we are more concerned with supporting a massively unpopular position than being a mainstream political party" (in my head they said that in a run on sentence)

I am calling it right now. The NDP will lose big next election. The gains in Quebec will largely disappear and they will win 40-65 seats.

The simple reality is that the filibuster accomplished nothing other than pissing off voters who overwhelmingly wanted the strike to end. While I am not saying that government should simply kow tow to the majority, I am not sure what the NDP thought they would accomplish by a 58 hour filibuster followed by a quick cave in.

Canada Post (workers)

"You have to know when to hold them...."...MASSIVE tactical error on the part of the CUPW...mix one part 20% fewer parcels/letters over five years...a long recession...public sick and tired of public sector unions with gold plated pensions and benefits that don't exist in the private sector...an anti-labor conservative majority government fresh into a new term...and you decide to go on rotating strikes?

This was the time to deal. It was the time to say "hey, we get it's a rough economic time and we'll do a deal for the benefit of the country"...instead they, much like George Pickett, decided to fight a stupid and un-winnable battle...and they lost big.

Canada Post (the business)

Management will get the deal they wanted...but the reality is that Canada Post can only slide further into irrelevancy as a result of the work stoppage...it wouldn't surprise me if Canada Post is privatized within five years and becomes much smaller/leaner.

How many people signed up for online billing last week?

Winners

Conservative party

A brilliant master stroke of maneuvering. On one hand they managed to take the side of the populist opinion (which is anti-union at the moment) and on the other they managed to deftly push the NDP into a corner.

The NDP had a choice. Back the conservatives and betray the party's traditional political base OR filibuster and piss of the majority of Canadians who just want their mail.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if Harper put in the (controversial) lower than previously offered wage deal just to put the NDP in a can't win proposition.

There was no way for the NDP to come out of this with a win...the liberals, bloc and Greens don't matter (at the moment)...huge win for the Tories

The public

They get their mail back and likely with a cheaper deal

Canada Post Digs Own Grave

2011-06-15T14:29:00.003-04:00

Ten years ago here was the regular mail I cared about:

Visa bill
Power bill
AMEX bill
Bank statement
Line of credit statement
Investment account statement
Christmas cards
Cable/internet bill
Cell phone bill

Today:

Power Bill

That's right...the only bill I get in the mail any more is my quarterly power bill and the only reason I still get that is because I refuse to allow anybody to automatically deduct funds from a credit card or bank account. Everything else I pay online monthly.

So, of course, Canada Post's union has decided that it's 1950 and that we are in boom times and should be paying postal employees like we're rich and drunk.

The problem with unions, the the public's negative opinion thereof, is that they seem to fight to the death in every situation regardless of reality.

In 2011 you simply cannot tell the public that uneducated employees deserve $23 an hour to start, banked sick days and up to 7 weeks vacation...I have two degrees and can't find that in the private sector and you expect me to pay higher taxes or postal rates so that they can make a fortune?

Canada Post has seen an almost 20% decline in mail in 5 years. 5 years! It has some of the highest postal rates in the world and generally lousy service and standards.

It is time to privatize the post office into a UPS model. No more 3rd class mail (which nobody wants) with packages making up the vast bulk of their service. Canada simply does not need 48,000 overpaid workers wandering the country delivering "mail" of which 90% goes in the trash.

Grantland makes no sense

2011-06-09T15:09:00.003-04:00

When you debut a website, the idea is to come out swinging and build a following. You aim for fresh insight, excellent writing and attempt to offer people something or some reason to fit you into their already lengthy daily reading list.

Grantland.com the ESPN spinoff that, frankly, never made any sense (why send viewers away from ESPN.com) is already a failure inside two days.

Today's gem articles.

Watching sports live is the only way to go by Chuck Klosterman.

This piece may have been insightful ten years ago when DVR's were being introduced. Today? It reads like something Klosterman (who I like) dredged out of the pile of stuff he couldn't sell and put up. There is just nothing new or insightful here, it's an argument everybody put to rest a decade ago.

LA Noire video game "review" by Tom Bissell

This is exactly the kind of article that will doom Grantland. It's a long winded review of a video game that came out three weeks ago.

There just isn't any demand for this type of article. Gamers who read reviews tend to do so within a week of a game being released. Their goal, as readers, is to decide if the game warrants a purchase. Period.

The idea that three weeks after release there is huge demand for an article like this is just silly. It's not that it's a bad article, it's that I can't imagine more than a handful of people would care enough about discussing a video game to read it.

Wrigley nostalgia piece #98424 by Dave Eggers

Wrigley is a great place to watch baseball...we get it.

The problem so far with Grantland is that it seems to be a small number of highly paid writers pretending it's 1950. The Wrigley piece would have been perfect as the long winded story featured in a Sports Illustrated week when nothing was otherwise happening in June. Except it isn't 1990 and nobody subscribes to Sports Illustrated anymore. It's nostalgia for the sake of nostalgia.

Not one piece so far in Grantland's history has been revelatory...it's all long winded junk pieces with limited appeal...I would love somebody at ESPN to explain me to me the goal here...is the target audience (richer subsection of ESPN users) really the type to click on banner ads for Subway?...was there massive demand for "Wrigley is a nice old ballpark" schmaltz?

Color me confused.

Jason Whitlock's intern

2011-05-17T22:03:00.002-04:00

You want to know what's wrong with America? I'll tell ya.

Jason Whitlock, millionaire columnist, tweeted this evening that he's looking for a college educated assistant who lives in LA and will work for $8-$10 an hour.

When reaction was immediately and swiftly negative, he came back to the effect that he wants somebody with passion willing to start at the bottom because that's what he did....and, of course...accused the responders of being entitled and what is wrong with America.

The problem with America is not that young people expect to be CEO on day 1 (although some do)...it's that management expects people to work for shit wages in the guise of "experience".

Why should somebody spend four years and as much as $200,000 getting a degree in order work for minimum wage for Whitlock? Does getting his dry cleaning really lead to wonderful career opportunities?

The problem is Whitlock...a guy who reportedly makes $750,000 a YEAR...offering a thankless job for shit money and expecting qualified people to apply because he's Jason Whitlock.

Why Stargate Universe failed

2011-05-11T16:47:00.001-04:00

So...unlikely to be a popular post due to the fact that nobody watched the show and few, I imagine, really care that it is gone...however...we wade ahead anyway.

Stargate Universe closed this week...canceled after two seasons...two seasons which paled in comparison to the 10 seasons SG-1 got...and the 5 Atlantis got...

Frankly, and let me shock you with some bluntness, the reality is that each series got 50% crappier than the last and, gasp, lasted half as long (what a coincidence).

SG-1 was great...Atlantis was watchable and Universe was shit...I wonder, seriously, what they expected when they rolled this turd out?

40 episodes of grim, grim and more grim...compared to ten seasons of actual humor on SG-1.

What I find most interesting is that the creators/writers so obviously decided that what had worked for TEN SEASONS somehow didn't work anymore and that the world wanted a grim and unpleasant series. How many murders, murder trials (not actually related to the murder), love interests dying, blindings and other horribleness did the creators think audiences yearned for?

Not to mention a complete absence of anything resembling a plot or direction...at least Voyager had the goal of getting home...the goal of Universe? To stay on a ship that had been on a journey for MILLIONS of years to prove the existence of God? I think?

Anyway...good riddance...it was clear from the end of the 4th episode that the show was doomed and audiences abandoned it in droves.

Cheerleader who refuses to cheer guy who assaulted her loses court case

2011-05-09T19:33:00.003-04:00

The Supreme Court this week refused to hear the case of a teenage girl who was kicked off her cheerleading team after refusing to cheer for the boy who sexually assaulted her.

As a result, she now owes the school $45,000 in legal fees.

The girl, known only as MS, accused a fellow student of raping her at a party. He plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge to avoid jail time and was allowed to return to school and the basketball team.

She continued to cheer for the team during games, but refused to shout the boy's name or clap for him when he shot free throws.

When the superintendent discovered what she was doing, she was kicked off the team. She sued the Texas school, arguing that her free speech rights had been violated, but two courts ruled that as a cheerleader she speaks for the school, not herself, and did not have the right to refuse.

The first reaction of 99% of the people who saw this story was "those bastards!". Those 99% are 100% wrong. The Supreme Court rightfully declined to hear this case because it was a slam dunk, no question whatsoever, win for the school board.

The reality is this:

- You don't have free speech when acting as an agent for somebody else. For the same reason you can't scream "FUCK YOU JIM" at the top of your lungs at work and expect to remain employed (if Jim is your boss), the job of cheerleader is to cheer. Not doing so is a failure to do the job and grounds for dismissal.

- Her winning would set an abominable precedent. If she is allowed "free speech" then everybody has to get it, right? What about a member of the KKK who refuses to cheer a black player? Is that ok? How about if Nancy just hates Jim and doesn't want to cheer for him?

Do you get my point? A ruling for this girl means that "cheerleading" is no longer a job that requires cheering but one that allows every cheerleader to decide what he or she is going to do (or not do) based on their own ethical, racial, social preferences.

You can easily envision ten cheerleaders of whom 5 are cheering, 2 are booing, 2 are sitting there giving the finger and one is doing lord knows what.

Do I think he should be kicked off the basketball team. Yes.
Do I think he faced enough consequences for his actions? I don't know. I don't have any of the facts on what happened or why probation was given vs jail or what have you.
Is what happened at all relevant to this case? No.

The only issue is this. Does a cheerleader have the right to independently decide what he/she will do when on the job and acting as a representative of the school?

Had I started this piece by saying "A white supremacist refused to cheer a black player and sued the school when removed from the team" you would undoubtedly have cheered such an action as entirely moral.

The only thing that matters is whether or she has the right to say and do what she wants while on the job. Why she refuses to cheer is irrelevant. That he is still on the team is irrelevant.

A 1st year lawyer should have told her that it was an un-winnable case from the get go. You don't have the right to say or do what you want when on the job. You never have.

Rob Granito

2011-03-25T17:24:00.011-04:00

If you haven't heard an"artist" named Rob Granito is in the midst of an internet shitstorm for allegedly copying other artists work and selling it as his own. An article on Bleeding Cool titled "Who is Rob Granito?" ignited a furor over the weekend.

High drama that included a Facebook "fan" page "Robert Granito is a fraud" go from zero to 2400 fans in two days. Mark Waid and Ethan Van Sciver taking it upon themselves to confront Robert at MegaCon. Rumours of Wizard and FanExpo banning him from future conventions.

One thing the drama has lacked is the answer to the most important question. Whose fault is this? The obvious answer, you scream, is Rob Granito. He's the guy who copied the artwork, he's the guy who lied about his credentials and he's the guy who orchestrated the scheme.

Except, he's not completely to blame. You know who shoulders a good chunk of the responsibility here?

#1 - Where were the artists over the last 5 years who saw this and did nothing?

Granito has apparently been on the convention circuit since 2006. He has no Comicbookdb.com credits, no Coverbrowser.com covers, no Wikipedia page, no pages for sale, no covers for sale, doesn't sketch in front of people (like every single other artist). If I as a consumer can do five seconds of research on a guest and find no info on him whatsoever to corroborate this guy being a "Marvel and DC cover artist" then how exactly did this not come up over the past five years?

How did no artist say to his DC or Marvel editor "this guy claims to have worked for you, is it true?" How did nobody notice any of the dozens of obvious rip-offs and say "hmm, that looks exactly like a piece by X?", why did NOBODY say "How come this Rob Granito guy is a featured guest, who the fuck is he?"

#2 - Where is the anger at the conventions for putting up bio's that couldn't be authenticated? Are you telling me that Wizard (et al) just accept whatever bio they are submitted and do zero fact checking?

It took two seconds to figure out this guy's resume was bogus. Famous international artists have wikipedia pages, they have credits on comic oriented databases, they have more than three items on ebay with their name attached.

Ethan Van Sciver has 209 items currently listed on ebay with his name in the title. Rob Granito has a sketch card and a commission that both look like they were drawn by a six year old and a signed index card. How was this not a massive red flag to anyone?

Marvel and DC often have booths...and nobody said to the Marvel rep "uh, who is Granito?".

#3 - Where is the personal responsibility? You are really going to try to convince me that people buying art have no responsibility to know anything about the art market when making a purchase?

Look, if you buy a piece for $300 because you like it, more power to you. If you bought it because Rob Granito is a famous artist who you'd never heard of before the show, then maybe you're just not doing your homework.

In other words:

In order for Rob Granito to exist you need to have a convention that doesn't ask any questions, you need an artist alley full of expert artists who fail to ask any questions and you have a room full of convention goers who walk in the door and decide to spend money at the guy's table even though they know nothing about his work or history.

People should be angry first at convention management who booked him, the artists who ignored his thievery until somebody braver decided to write about it and then themselves for not bothering to educate themselves and then feeling duped when that lack of education bites them in the rear.

Oh and Granito, he's a jerk. You should be angry at him as well.

Kicking the Sports Guy's ass yet again pt 2

2011-03-25T10:15:00.004-04:00

Just a quick update...as you know...I don't care (at all) about the corrupt NCAA or college basketball...but every year I thrash Bill Simmons in the ESPN bracket competition.

Basically...going into tonight...I am 326,643rd and he is 4.7 millionth...as we've both picked Kansas to win the title...it comes down to this...his hopes ride entirely on Ohio State...I have three other games left where I can score pts....and I am ahead 120 pts...

UPDATE...well Kentucky defeated Ohio State...so before the elite 8 is even played, I've beaten the Sports Guy.

I currently have 590 pts and rank 280, 793rd and he has 430 pts and ranks 4.871 millionth.

We both have Kansas winning the title (his only team left)...while I can widen my margin of victory with a Florida and/or UConn win in the next round (the only two other games I have left (I picked Syracuse to face off against Kansas)

So...3rd year in a row...big shock.

Groupon is doomed

2011-03-24T10:18:00.004-04:00

Take it to the bank, in it's current form, the coupon-via-email business is doomed to go down as a fad.

Math, as usual, supplies us with the answers.

A restaurant takes a $100 meal (that costs them $50) and marks it down to $50 (Groupon requires at least a 50% markdown), they hand Groupon 30-50% of that. Let's assume 30% for my example.

The restaurant, then, LOSES $15 per coupon that is redeemed, right? They are providing a $50 meal but only getting $35.

1000 customers buy-in and 80% actually use the coupon (20% get lazy and let it expire)

800 customers at $15 loss per is $12,000. The profit on 200 customers not using the coupon is $35X200 or $7000.

In short...restaurant loses $5000.

Now...800 people come in and enjoy a meal for $50...how many are likely to return for the same meal which would now cost them $100?

Using our trusty math, we find that the restaurant needs 50 of those customers to return in order to make a $5000 profit.

So...1000 coupons sold...800 redeemed...50 return visits...and the restaurant has netted $0.0

Here's the thing...

1) People don't like to see massive price increases. They just had a meal for $50 and now you are telling them it's $100.

2) There are more deals on the horizon. Why should I, as a customer, go back to your place for $100 when I can try a new one for $50? I can literally eat out twice as often under Groupon than under your regular prices.

3) I have used the most optimistic numbers possible. I've chosen the lowest Groupon commission (30%) and the highest non redemption rate (20%). A 50% commission and 100% redemption rate leaves you with a staggering $25,000 loss on 1000 coupons. You would need 500 return visits just to break even in that case.

4) I have also ignored any increased staffing costs. i.e if you were busy, you wouldn't need Groupon so does having 800 new bookings mean you need to bring on extra short term staff?

So...

- Groupon is likely to run out of businesses stupid enough to offer huge deals so they can lose money.

- Consumers are likely to a) get sick of endless emails b) feel Groupon remorse where you buy stuff you don't need or want c) not want to deal with coupons with expiration dates.

I just don't see how this ends well. It almost looks like a pyramid scheme. Groupon needs more and more businesses offering crazier and crazier discounts in order to operate and I just don't see that happening forever.

The myth of the book store

2011-03-18T15:22:00.000-04:00

I recently read this article that basically represents every single "demise of the book store" type piece. The problem, as I see it, is that all of these arguments cling to a romantic ideal of the bookstore that does not and has never existed.

Let's look at this logically. What do you want out of a bookstore:

1) Getting the book you want
2) Getting a book you didn't know you wanted
3) Getting whatever you buy at the best price
4) Having chance meetings that lead to love or friendship.

So, where does the physical bookstore stack up against an online retailer.

1) Certainly a bookstore offers a more immediate resolution to your book buying needs. However, given that the online retailer is pretty much guaranteed to have more stock (i.e. their stock is in various giant warehouses vs individual stores) in fewer places, the odds of getting the book you want are much higher online, especially if you're looking for an obscure or less popular title.

2) #2 and #4 are the classic book store arguments. So, ask yourself this, how many books have you read and loved because you were browsing a bookstore and decided to buy something on an impulse?

I find books via best-of lists, award nominees, word of mouth, reviews, best seller rankings etc..etc...

In other words, the idea of random browsing as a way to find amazing books is, by definition, absurd. There are 181,000 new books published annually in the US. You are really going to tell me that random wandering through a bookstore is more efficient than any of the methods I listed above?

3) No contest, online wins

4) This has got to be the single greatest book buying myth. Quick, how many of your friends did you meet in a bookstore? How many romantic partners have you married after meeting in a bookstore?

Granted, you'll never meet anyone through Amazon so any chance greater than zero makes the bookstore a winner, but how does the reality of "book store random conversation" stack up with the romantic myth of "book store random conversation"?

As far as I am concerned, the bookstore as a) way to find books you wouldn't otherwise read b) way to meet wonderful people is massively overwhelmed by the size, selection, price, instant reviews etc.. of the online world.

I love bookstores...I do...and other than a "I need a birthday present quick" scenario, pretty much never go into one. The online world is cheaper and better in pretty much every conceivable way.

Kicking the Sports Guy's ass yet again

2011-03-18T14:31:00.002-04:00

For the 3rd year in a row, I've entered ESPN's NCAA March Madness online bracket...

Two years ago I blogged as my single bracket put up by a guy who doesn't follow college or pro basketball and completed in all of 30 seconds just annihilated ESPN's Bill Simmons.]

Last year I once again crushed him in similar circumstances.

This year is proving no different. As of this moment, Simmons is pretty close to dead last in the ESPN world, ranking 5,8 MILLIONTH...I, on the other hand, am 262nd...yah, that's right, I am only 5.8 million spots ahead of him on only the 2nd day of the tourney.

While my beating him is meaningless in the larger sense...I continually find it amusing that a professional sportswriter and a professed gambler literally can't pick NFL games or NCAA March Madness games to save his life.

Good thing the Matrix ended when it did

2011-03-16T13:19:00.000-04:00

There are good reasons movies typically end as the romantic relationship begins, for example, as the reality if day to day relationshipping is often boring day to day stuff and not the sparkle and romance of the courting phase.

It's also why a lot of movies end at juuust the right spot.

The Matrix trilogy, if you'll remember, ends as humanity and the machines reach a truce (as a result of Neo's self sacrifice and defeat of agent Smith) with the machines promising to unplug anyone who wants out of the matrix.

Telling the populace

So...let's start this tale at the 4th (theoretical) movie...the machines do what exactly? Put out a big message across the sky that says "It's really 2199 and you are being used as a battery"? Can you imagine the combination of panic and craziness that would ensue?

I need needles, more needles!

When Neo is unplugged the crew of the ship have to re-build (build?) his muscles through stimulation. Hundreds and hundreds of needles are used. Is there a needle factory left on earth that could produce the quantity needed to build the muscles of the millions? billions? of humans that might now demand to be freed from the matrix?

Remember, this is a devastated world with one human city left.

I am an accountant, oh wait!

So, let's say the machines help out and provide all the resources needed to free everyone who wants out of the matrix. Every thing that every person knows is 100% useless in the new world. Remember, it's 2199. A world in which human beings have hover ships, virtual tech and lord knows what else.

Could you take a doctor from 1811 and transport them to today and end up with anything other than catastrophic results?

You would suddenly have millions of people trying to integrate into a society two hundred years more advanced.

Where is my accountant?

On the flip side, what happens to the people who opt to stay in the matrix? You literally would face huge chunks of people simply disappearing every day. If enough people decided to leave you would face huge societal disruptions in the same way the plague swept through Europe.

Where is my mansion?

You decide to stay in the matrix and now face the existential crisis of nothing you doing mattering in any way shape or form. Why should you go to "work" when "work" doesn't really exist?

Remember, there is no factory that makes ipods (it's virtual) there is no farm, no company, no anything. It's all a dream. Would you really want to go spend your day making hamburgers if you knew that your crappy job really didn't exist?

My wife is where?

Who says that your wife or kids (are they really YOUR kids?) are anywhere near you on the planet. You decide to unplug and your wife is on the other side of the planet. Are the machines going to help relocating everybody to Zion?

Mmm gruel

I hope you like gruel because there isn't much to eat in Zion...oh and there will be even less when millions of people are unplugged and need food/water/housing/jobs/medical treatment etc...etc...

Where's the sun?

Did you forget? The world is a barren wasteland where no sunlight hits the ground.

In other words, the humans would be better off if the machines double crossed the humans and kept everyone as batteries.

New direction?

2011-03-14T11:43:00.003-04:00

For the past three years, I've posted pretty much five times a week. I have prided myself on being logical, if not particularly nice. You may absolutely find fault with my writing, my tone, and a million other aspects of this blog, but my hope is that it's very hard to point to one of my pieces and go "that's just totally illogical"!

I've picked on Jeff Pearlman, Tom Verducci, Peter King, Bill Simmons, Jon Heyman and hundreds of others for their puff pieces...I've picked on society...I've picked on the media...I have prided myself on the idea that no article or event was out of bounds.

I haven't been posting much over the past couple months mostly because I've been trying to figure out what to do with this blog. I don't think I am wrong to call people on their lack of logic, but I think I need to change the level of vitriol. Sure Peter King is a NFL Management stooge, but does that make him a bad person? Sure, Simmons sold out long ago (why does nobody else notice this?) and veered towards puff pieces...but is that really what I want to post about 250 times a year?

I think I need to add more original content rather than simply responding to others...I think I need to do slightly longer pieces...I think I need to post better and, as a result, less often.

So...the plan as of today is to go Monday-Wednesday-Friday...we'll see from there.

How to lose money

2011-03-06T09:44:00.003-05:00

by Cory Doctorow

Sage advice from 37 Signals' Jason Fried on how to get good at making money through low-risk iteration and practice:

Full article

So here's a great way to practice making money: Buy and sell the same thing over and over on Craigslist or eBay. Seriously.
Go buy something on Craigslist or eBay. Find something that's a bit of a commodity, so you know there's always plenty of supply and demand. An iPod is a good test. Buy it, and then immediately resell it. Then buy it again. Each time, try selling it for more than you paid for it. See how far you can push it. See how much profit you can make off 10 transactions.
Start tweaking the headline. Then start fiddling with the product description. Vary the photographs. Take some pictures of the thing for sale; use other photos with other items, or people, in them. Shoot really high-quality shots, and also post crappy ones from your cell-phone camera. Try every variation you can think of.
I love doing this, because there's no real risk involved. If you already have a business, you don't need to dream up a new product line or rock the boat with crazy experiments. If you don't have a business, it's a perfect way to work on your chops.

Now...the article should have been entitled "How to lose money" because it's just that stupid.

1) There is this mysterious thing called "transaction costs" that should immediately ring alarm bells in anyone who reads this article.

Let's look at ebay and craigslist separately

a) ebay

You buy something for $90 and have it shipped to you for $10. You have paid $100.
You immediately turn around and re-list it on ebay, it sells for $100 plus $10 shipping.
Congrats you lost money.

Let's say you are a gambler...you opt to save money and avoid a starting price above $0.99...you avoid "buy it now"...(i.e. you risk the item going for far less than it's "worth" but pay less in fees)

You'll pay 9% to ebay and 2.9% plus $0.30 to paypal. Or $12.20 in fees.

So...including shipping you bought an item for $100...sold it for $110 ...and netted a grant sum loss of $12.20. REMEMBER the shipping cost to you counts as part of the purchase price...going the other way, the only money you care about when selling is the pre-shipping amount.

But, wait, you cry...what if I sold it for $120!...well...$110 plus $10 shipping means that ebay and paypal get $13.39 in fees...so you take the $110 you sold it for and take away the fees and you've netted a loss of $3.39.

You, being delusional at this point, cry...what if I sold it for $130!...$120 plus $10 shipping again means fees for ebay and paypal...totaling $14.58..meaning that you've made $5.42.

I want you to think about that...you bought an item on ebay and need to turn it around at a 30% increase in order to make any money.

b) craigslist

Aha! Craigslist is free! It also has zero consumer protection and features the most pain in the ass buyers in the history of the planet.

For fun, create an ad for a brand new, in the box ipod and see what kind of response you get for it. I'll bet anything you will get swamped with people who want to lowball you and people who will simply waste your time with inane questions.

Oh, and you also have to meet a stranger and expect that the agreed upon amount will almost certainly no longer be what they are offering when you meet. i.e. Offer something for $100...agree to sell it for $70...meet them and find they "only" have $60 on them...happens ALL the time.

So, what you gain in transaction costs and lack of shipping you lose in travel and pain in the ass costs.

2) You are BY DEFINITION buying at the high end

You bought the ipod...doesn't that mean that you were the person willing to pay the highest amount for that ipod? Clearly, ebay is not an efficient marketplace in the sense that different people are always logging on...so a guy willing to pay $130 for that ipod may not have been online during that auction...but it stands to reason that in the liquid marketplace suggested by the author (will explain in a minute) that prices are not going to swing wildly by 30%

3) Liquid markets don't have huge price swings

Why is a can of coke basically the same cost at every convenience store? Because there are a zillion convenience stores, right?

A liquid market is basically where there are lots of buyers and sellers always engaging in the sale of a given item (say Apple stock). If you decide you need to sell your Rolex there are lots of people out there willing to buy at any given moment, just are there are lots of people willing to sell. If you want to sell buy or sell a Van Gogh, there are far fewer out there for sale (very limited number) and very few people with the resources to buy one.

In other words, it's easier to sell a can of coke than it is to sell a Rolex than it is to sell a Van Gogh.

What that means is that the price of a can of coke may be $0.95 somewhere and it might be $1.05 somewhere but generally speaking it goes for $1. Which means that you can't buy a can of Coke for $1 and expect to sell it for $1.30.

4) Ipods are the WORST possible choice

Ipods are, by definition, on a downward price curve. When the new ipad was announced, the amount re-sellers were offering for 1st gen ipads went from $375 to $300 overnight. The price is still dropping.

In other words, you are buying an item whose value is always going down and trying to sell it for 30% more than you bought it. Does that make any sense?

5) Nobody else does this

Seriously, I want somebody to come forward and declare they make a living buying and selling the same item on ebay. It won't happen because it makes zero sense. For every time you actually manage to sell something for 30% more than you paid, you will sell something at 85% of what you paid.

Not to mention the huge time cost in doing all of this.

In other words, PLEASE don't listen to this kind of shit.

Car alarms

2011-02-18T09:58:00.003-05:00

I live on the 24th floor...I just spend the last half hour listening to an endless car alarm.

I want to know what the point is? Like, if you own that car and are so far away/not in a position to respond when the damn alarm goes of for a HALF HOUR! what good does it do you? Do you really think I give a shit about your car?

When was the last time you heard a car alarm go off and ran out to find out where it was coming from? Oh right, Never!

I really think car alarms should be made illegal. What do they accomplish other than annoy people? Nobody responds because nobody cares and the owner is too far away to do anything about it anyway.

Smart Grids

2011-02-17T13:29:00.002-05:00

Boulder Smart Grid

When Boulder, Colorado, launched its SmartGridCity project along with utility Xcel Energy back in 2008, the college town of roughly 100,000 residents was greeted with international attention. Local leaders traveled to Copenhagen, Dublin and Paris to talk about how they planned to use an intersection of new technology and behavioral economics to lower energy use.

Sigh

Economics is really simple in a lot of ways. You know how you get people to use less energy. You raise prices.

You see people are smart, when something is cheap they use a lot of it. When it's expensive they use as little as possible.

Electricity usage is pretty elastic. In other words, the odds are that you could cut your electricity usage by 25% pretty easily. I unplug my microwave when it's not in use, I have my entire tv/stereo system on a single power bar that is off most of the time, I don't leave lights on, I wear clothes appropriate for the weather (i.e. a sweater or blanket is cheaper that heating) and I do everything possible to keep things off when they aren't in use.

When I lived in an apartment with electricity included as part of my rent, I lived with the A/C on 24/7 in the summer, I left lights on, I left the tv on for the cat (who doesn't care) and generally never gave the electric bill paid by my landlord a second's thought.

So rather than spending massive amounts of money installing smart grids, just raise prices! I guarantee you will get the same result with less hassle.

Jon Heyman paid by agents?

2011-02-16T19:12:00.003-05:00

I think it's clear we have to ask the question. Is Jon Heyman, writer for CNNSI, being paid or influenced by MLB agents?

I ask this, because his batshit insane columns can only be explained if he's on the take.

His latest round of drivel has two massive logical flaws that are impossible to explain away.

Concerning Albert Pujols...

The Cardinals made what they consider a great effort, and indications are that they showed a willingness to go to seven or eight years, with the eight-year deal being for a lower average annual value, maybe $25 million for eight and $28 million for seven, or something along those lines (though those numbers couldn't be absolutely confirmed).

Let's sidestep the obvious that seven for 25 (175 million) and 8 for 28 (196) are pulled straight out of his ass (unconfirmed) and contradict every other report out there (that says the Cardinals lowballed him) and point out that there is pretty close to now way in hell he turns down 8 for 28...

Why...because he has no leverage.

Let's bring in Heyman's piece de resistance.

The market for Pujols' services might be hurt by the fact that the Yankees already have Mark Teixeira and the Red Sox will have presumably locked up Adrian Gonzalez by the time the season ends. But it will still be ripe for the greatest player ever to reach free agency. The Rangers, Orioles, Nationals, Giants and Angels also look like possibilities.

The Rangers have a young team and a payroll that ranked 27/30 in Major League baseball last year...they are going to sign an aging slugger for 7 years just as their team all hits arbitration? And go from a 55 million dollar club to 80 million with the fates tied to one player? Aim to repeat the A-Rod debacle where the team paid like 80 million to get out of his contract?

The Orioles...who continually suck...are going to jump from 81 million in payroll to 110 just to finish 3rd in the AL East?

The Nationals and their 61 million dollar payroll are going to put up 240 million for Pujols?

The Angels who wouldn't cough up 80 million for Beltre are going to triple that for Pujols?

Are you getting my drift? You simply cannot expect a bunch of sub 100 million dollar teams to tie everything to a 32 year old first baseman.

There are exactly two options for Pujols...the Cubs and Cardinals...nobody else with the necessary cash (and if he's turning down 28 million a year that's the top 5 payroll teams in MLB) and need of a first baseman is out there as an option.

The Phillies are tapped out...the Mets have huge problems with the law...the White Sox want to trim payroll...the Yanks and Red Sox have longterm good fielding first baseman...and the Angels don't see any need to jump into the 140 million dollar payroll group in a weak division.

So, what leverage does Pujols have?

I predict 7/30 he signs with the Cardinals.

Why do I think he's paid by agents? Every article quotes unnamed executives who always seem to say something super flattering about the player's market value or makes it seem like there are a dozen teams chomping at the bit to sign a player...I have never seen a columnist more clearly on the player's side than Heyman.

I just don't trust anything he writes.

Lance Armstrong

2011-01-19T14:10:00.002-05:00

CNNSI has levied fresh (I think) allegations against Lance Armstrong.

Now, let's use some logic...there are four possibilities

1) Sport is clean - Lance is clean
2) Sport is clean - Lance is dirty
3) Sport is dirty - Lance is clean
4) Sport is dirty - Lance is dirty

Now...we know the sport is dirty because people keep getting caught...which leaves us with two possibilities.

Either

A) Lance Armstrong managed to crush a bunch of world class athletes who were cheaters seven years in a row while doing it clean.

B) Lance Armstrong is just as dirty as all the rest of them.

Do you see my point? How naive do you have to be to accept that Lance managed to crush the competition for SEVEN years in a row while THEY were cheating? He'd literally have to be far and away the greatest cyclist in the history of cycling.

Which is more likely? He's just that far above everyone else or he's a cheater?

I don't know about you, but I would bet the farm he's a cheater and he'll eventually have to come out and admit it.

MIA + Jeter

2011-01-18T13:24:00.003-05:00

My apologies for being MIA, I am considering what do with the future of the blog and have been involved elsewhere...

So...another bullshit puff piece from Tom Verducci...on Derek Jeter sucking:

Long is betting on the bounceback, especially because he knows one element to Jeter's issues last season is gone: Jeter doesn't have a contract situation to concern him.

"I feel like Derek always has been the type of player who cares about winning instead of the numbers," Long said. "I think the contract probably caused him to think more about numbers than he otherwise would want to. It probably did affect his performance.

For the millionth time...interviewing team personnel about team personnel is ALWAYS a waste of time.

Let's parse.

The team's hitting coach is blaming Derek Jeter's lack of hitting on the fact that Jeter was worried about his next contract.

Sigh

Derek Jeter has earned 205 MILLION so far in his baseball career and earned 8.5 million in endorsements in 2010. Being reasonable, let's assume he's now earned 250-300 million in his career.

In other words...there are a number of ways Long could answer the question.

1) I suck as a hitting coach
2) Derek Jeter is old and losing his skills
3) Derek Jeter was worried about a contract

Do you see what I mean? He can't say that he is the problem and he can't say that Jeter is old because he just resigned for 3 more years. His only option is to come up with some sort of bullshit response that intimates that a guy who has earned 300 million in his career was so worried about his next contract that he spent a year sucking.

Wow

2011-01-10T10:52:00.002-05:00

http://theclicker.todayshow.com/_news/2011/01/07/5786918-2-year-old-dons-madonnas-cone-bra-for-toddlers-and-tiaras

I think there should be a new parent suitability test. It will have one question.

"Do you think it's suitable for your fucking two year old to prance on stage in a gold outfit with exaggerated cone bra and dance like a hooker?"

Simple. These people (who are clearly insane) would say "yes" and the kids would be taken away and given to parents who might actually be capable of rational thought.

I cannot stress enough how stunningly awful the video is. It is simply not within miles of "normal" to have your two year old perform like this. It's creepy and disturbing and the worst part is that none of these parents seem capable of seeing that.

Bill Simmons is getting more absurd by the column

2011-01-07T13:25:00.002-05:00

As I have written before, I once loved Bill Simmons. I remember sitting at my work and literally having to leave the office because I was laughing so hard I couldn't breath (let alone work) while reading one of his columns.

But he's pure fluff now...he's become what the Bill Simmons of ten years ago would have hated...he's not relevant (unless you could his "my daughter likes the color purple" as deep stuff) and less and less readable by the column.

His latest opus is on the imaginary "rivalry" between Peyton Manning and Tom Brady...I could point out that football is a team sport and individuals who play the same position rarely have big rivalries in football...but the reality is that there is no rivalry...Tom Brady is Joe Montana and Peyton Manning is Dan Marino...what else is there to say? Brady is 8-4 head to head against Peyton, his winning percentage is best all time, he's ahead on Superbowls wins 3-1 and Superbowl appearances 4-2...he's so far ahead on playoff record 14-4 vs 9-8 that it's absurd...

Manning is a fantastic regular reason QB and a 1st ballot hall of famer (just like Marino) but there is no question that Brady is the better QB.

I should add that it's embarrasing that an aging fantasy sports playing white guy thinks he has the street cred to use the Biggie/Tupac feud as the basis of his "rivalry" conditions....the lack of self awareness there is amazing.

I should add that the most absurd comment in the piece is this one:

The only reason Favre's streak of 297 starts doesn't seem like a bigger deal? Because Manning is poised to break it in 2016. He's 89 away. And after watching him play in 2008 on a twice-operated-on knee that suffered a staph infection, it's pretty clear we'll need a chainsaw (or Bernard Pollard swinging a chainsaw) to prevent Manning from breaking that record. How high could he go? 300? 325? Imagine if Cal Ripken also finished with 4,000 hits and 800 homers … couldn't that be Manning?

Wow...Peyton Manning turns 35 in March...so Simmons is tossing out 2016 like it's some sort of fait accompli...89 games is the next full 5 seasons (35-39) and more than half of his 40th year (19th season)...with an 18 game season...it's the end of the 5th season...

In other words...the reason people don't care about Brett Favre is a) games started in a row is a bullshit meaningless statistic b) people hate Brett Favre...not because people thought "Peyton is only 89 away!" as if we all have his current streak written on our fucking calendars.

The downside of bullshit

2011-01-06T12:01:00.002-05:00

We live in a world that is pretty much trying to fuck us over 24/7...we don't trust politicians, we don't trust government, we don't trust corporations and we don't trust each other.

The problem is that it all has, I believe, a cumulative effect.

Take my building for example. We had "free" visitor's parking for tenants (I say "free" because I pay rent) that has now become "not free" visitor's parking.

Now...the official reason is (I kid you not) "to encourage greater vehicle turnover and to control abuse of surface parking spaces"...I wish I could post the entire newsletter left in my mailbox...it's written in classic buzzword form and basically 100% bullshit.

We both know that the building wants to make money off the lot and doesn't have the guts (or good graces) to simply say so.

The problem is that when faced with people trying to lie or screw you over at every turn, people react in a rational manner and try to screw them back.

Let's say the building wants access to my apartment and doesn't give me 24 hours notice...well, fuck you, you're not getting in.

Let's say I'm moving out and they want me to repaint the cabinets because I painted them blue...well fuck you, not doing it.

They want their three key cards back when I move...fuck you, they are going in the garbage.

Do you see what I mean? All we do is create adversarial relationships where none need exist and that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I pretty much why we have road rage and air rage and people ready to snap at any moment.

Which isn't a good thing.

MLB Hall of Fame

2011-01-05T14:25:00.002-05:00

Bert Blyleven was voted in Cooperstown today.

You know what words have never been spoken? "We have to go see that game, Blyleven is pitching!"

The two time all-star (yes two) and zero Cy Young winner (four top 10 finishes) managed to whine his way into the hall of fame (see, Lynn Swan)

I just have to ask, other than his impressive 287-250 record (oh wait that's a function of sticking around and being above average for a long time) and strikouts (admittedly something he was good at), what exactly qualifies him as a hall of famer?

Pedro Martinez is a hall of famer...you look at his resume and it screams "wow, that dude could pitch"...Blyleven looks like a capable solid guy who ate up innings and did his job.

I vote for an end to 15 years on the ballot...the utterly absurd notion of somebody gaining support every year for 15 years (see, Jim Rice) is downright silly. Blyleven's first hall of fame vote came in either 97 or 98 (5 years after retirement) and suddenly he's a hall of famer? Like the dozen votes where he was not a hall of famer don't scream "hey, this guy doesn't deserve it!".

I don't get it...guys like Tim Raines (2nd best leadoff hitter in history) get mediocre support but guys like Blyleven get to wear the jacket?

Yay to being above average long enough to appear good!

sigh

2011 Brings yet more stupidity in MLB - big shock

2011-01-04T21:37:00.004-05:00

Why are MLB types so stupid? I really want an answer to this. Somebody has to have the ability to explain to me why teams shell out huge deals that look bad the very second they are signed! It's like 90% of the GM's out there are hiring hookers left, right and center and the agent's all have the photos!

The latest example of idiocy is the 96 million the rangers are planning on handing to 13 year vet Adrian Beltre over six years. In my book anything north of 15 million dollars per year is superstar money and Beltre is guaranteed (guaranteed!) to not be worth this contract or come anywhere close.

Let's look at his stats.

He's played 13 years, is 31 and the decline for hitters typically starts at 32...so signing him to a six year mega deal is perfect timing!

Ok...so 13 years in the bigs...

Number of years he's hit for a higher than .275 average? 3
Number of years he's hit more than 30 home runs? 1
Number of years with a better than .350 on base percentage? 3
Number of years with an OPS+ higher than 115? 2

(by the way...a .275 average is crappy, a .350 on base is a bit above average, an OPS+ of 115 is not great -superstars are above 140....i.e. I haven't chosen numbers (except for home runs) that are terribly high water marks of performance...and he still fails to get above them 90% of the time)

And here's the kicker...his best two years 2004 and 2010 (which account for 2 high average, 2 high on base, 2 OPS+ higher than 115 and the more than 30 home run year) were contract years! Gee amazing coincidence hunh?

In other words...the rangers have decided to pay a guy who 6/13 years has been sub-replacement (i.e OPS+ of 100 = a perfectly average player) and whose only two great years were contract years a shit load of money as he gets older and even less productive!

It's fantastic stuff. It's like saying "I bet the 31 year old guy has finally figured it out after signing a massive deal with Seattle and sucking for 5 years, being humbled and taking a one year deal with the Red Sox in a super friendly hitting park where, shock, he hit well" vs "this guy clearly only plays hard in contract years and doesn't give a crap once he's been paid (see, 5 years in Seattle)."

I am not saying I'd be super-GM, but nobody in the Rangers boardroom said "we are a small market team and signing this guy to a huge chunk of our payroll is stupid"?

Unreal

Edgar Renteria

2010-12-17T10:30:00.002-05:00

The San Francisco Giants have reportedly offered a 1 year / 1 million dollar deal to shortstop Edgar Renteria (who happened to be the World Series MVP)

Edgar is offended and indicated that he'd rather stay home with his family for that kind of money.

He's 100% right.

In reading the comments that abound on the internet the vast majority seem to fall into one camp.

- 1 million dollars is a lot of money so he should shut up

Which shows an amazing lack of perspective.

Look at it this way. If you earn 50K and your boss turns around and offers you 5K next year, I am pretty sure you'd be pissed and probably say the exact same thing.

You see, Edgar hasn't earned less than 2 million per season since 1998. In the last 12 years he's earned about 85.5 million dollars.

So why should he accept a 90% paycut?

Do you see what I mean? You cannot relate other people's salary to your own. He's used to making 10 million a season, so in his mind that is what he's worth. Just be cause he earns many multiples of what the rest of us earn is not the point. He isn't the "rest of us".

The Giants should have either made him a fair offer (1 year 4 or 5 million) or simply moved on. They don't gain anything by throwing out an offer that is clearly not going to be accepted and just makes them look cheap.

Cliff Lee

2010-12-14T11:15:00.003-05:00

Ok...had to post about this.

Cliff Lee is going to sign a 5 year 130 million dollar deal with the Phillies...he is going to spurn the Rangers and Yankees and about 30 million guaranteed in order to do so...everyone is or will be going into fits about his leaving 30 million on the table.

The problem is that he made a super rational decision that makes perfect sense.

1) He'd have been a huge chunk of the Rangers payroll...maybe as much as 25%...think that bodes well for his long term success?

2) NY has a cost of living multiple times that of Philadelphia and far more pressure

3) The National league is far easier than the American league

4) He has a MUCH better chance of hall of fame numbers in the National league (and the long term marketability that brings)

5) He positions himself for a final 2-3 year contract at 37 vs probably being done at 39.

In other words, yah, he left 30 million on the table. He also avoided a long term nightmare with the Rangers and he avoided the huge spotlight and rabid competition of the AL East in favor of a shorter deal with a powerhouse team that is likely to remain a powerhouse team over the course of the deal AND which gives him a much better shot of winning enough games to get him over 200 (he'd need 98 over the next 5 years) and into Hall of Fame discussion.

Dude is guaranteed to earn AT LEAST 153 million in his MLB career (not counting endorsements) and may well be in line for another deal at 37.

So, it's not so crazy when you actually look at the numbers.

On Holiday

2010-12-13T21:47:00.001-05:00

I've decided to take the last three weeks of the year off from blogging...so back Jan 3rd...have a great holiday season!

Calling in sick

2010-12-10T11:29:00.002-05:00

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40536366/ns/business-bloomberg_businessweek/

I love corporations.

This article (admittedly mostly anecdotal) describes situations where companies are hiring spies (at $75 an hour) to report on whether or not employees are really out sick or playing hooky.

So many questions!

1) If a corporation has the cash to pay somebody $75 to spy on their employees, why not just hire more employees? I realize these spies aren't full-time (or receive benefits) but doesn't it just seem silly to pay somebody $75 an hour to spy on somebody making $30 an hour?

2) How many sick days are these people really taking? I am continually amazed at how a company would rather fire a worker and go through the long and costly process of hiring/training a new one rather than let something slide. It really is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

3) Wouldn't the company be better off spending money trying to fix the problem? Clearly if people are calling in sick all the time they are either a) bad hires or b) your company sucks to work for. So either you need to address your HR issues (bad hires) or figure out why your employees hate you so much they would risk getting fired just to take a sick day and get away from you.

4) How hostile a work environment does this create once this is found out? Like if Bob gets fired for taking a sick day, does the company not think "Bob is going to tell his (former) co-workers what happened and the entire office is going to hate us more". Right? If I found out that the company was hiring spies to check on me every time I called in sick, ya think I'd want to work there long term?

Morrison - Bake Sales

2010-12-09T10:13:00.002-05:00

Jim Morrison (singer of the Doors...dead for quite awhile) is likely to be pardoned shortly for a charge of indecent exposure at a concert...nice to see the government worrying about pressing issues...it's not like happened 40 years ago or that Jim has been dead for 39 or anything...

Can we please stop with posthumous acts? (other than like a medal of honor or something). Jim's dead and doesn't give a shit anymore.

School bake sales are in trouble with a bill that gives the government power to limit bake sales at school events. Predictably there is an uproar (big shock)

Here's the thing. We are fat and getting fatter, does it maybe not make sense to try and stop getting so fat? It's all well and good to cry "personal freedom!" but the reality is that you can't sell guns at a school function, and being fat kills more people in the US than guns do.

I am not big on government but it's clear that the private sector keeps making everything as fattening as possible and maybe, just maybe, reducing the amount of shit eaten at school is a good step towards not being the fattest nation on earth anymore.

Easterbrook - Sampras

2010-12-08T10:40:00.002-05:00

Gregg Easterbrook goes further off the deep end every week with his TMQ column on ESPN. Lately he's railed against rules he doesn't understand, gotten some very crucial statistics way wrong, harps on the same fucking things week after week.

Yesterday's logic failure is funny enough to write about.

In short...if you have one teacher and ten students in one class and one teacher and twenty students in another class, Easterbrook argues that the 2nd class is half as important because the ration of staff/student is half as much.

Sigh.

He rambles on about the size of athletic departments in Div 1 football vs the size of English departments and argues that at Ohio state (If I remember correctly, too lazy to look it up) must consider the English department 74 times less important that football when you consider the ratios of staff/student or player.

Now...don't get me wrong...I think college athletics are as corrupt as the Nigerian government...I think football factories lose money on football at the cost of the rest of the university...I think any football program that can't make money on it's own (and few can under the current system) should be shut down...I am 100% against the absurdity of big schools paying cupcakes to goose their win/loss record...

However...Easterbrook's argument makes zero sense...it's clear that 100 teachers can teach 1000 students or 2000 students with close to the same amount of work...you just have to mark 1000 more papers/exams...right? A lecture for one student is the same lecture for 1000 students!

I could go on but it's a stupid enough argument that even writing about it is annoying.

Pete Sampras had a large chunk of his tennis memorabilia stolen the other day out of a public storage unit.

I have to wonder...did he really think he was going to sign up for a public storage unit and that fact was not going to get into the hands of a criminal? I mean, what are the odds that the minimum wage earning guy who runs the place didn't call somebody up and say "Pete Sampras has locker 612 and probably has thousands of dollars worth of stuff in there".

It's one thing for you or I to rent storage to store our shit, it's another for a famous tennis player. I hope he gets his stuff back, but if I were him, I'd have stored it at a friend's place.

Marvin Miller Redux

2010-12-07T10:46:00.001-05:00

Marvin Miller has once again failed to be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame and, as usual, idiot sportswriters are lamenting the fact. Here is last year's post on the subject.

Joe Posnanksy's (CNNSI) latest piece of drivel is his piece on Marvin Miller.

He says that Marvin Miller is the single biggest omission to the baseball hall of fame...he then quotes Jim Bouton, Bob Costas and Bill James who agree with him.

Let me ask you a question. Should the guy who invented steroids be in the baseball hall of fame? Seriously, that guy (I presume it was a guy) had a trans-formative effect on the game in a huge way.

You see, Marvin Miller did zippo for the game of baseball. Nada. Zero. What he did (as was his job) was to be an advocate for the players he was paid to represent.

In that capacity, he is pretty much directly responsible for three strikes and two lockouts in his 16 years as player rep. Think about that. 1/3 years on the job, there was some sort of problem with management big enough to disrupt the national past-time.

In the years since his retirement he has railed against pretty much everything. He thinks the salary cap is evil (the NFL has since crushed baseball as the national sport and that is almost certainly in part due to parity). He hates the idea of drug testing and a million other things that show he only has one interest, the players he once represented.

So, here's the deal. If MLB players want to create a hall of fame, then they can certainly let Marvin in but "baseball" as a sport is no better off with his participation. He invented no rules, pioneered no strategy shifts, created no statistics, no he basically created the economic system where shit pitchers make millions and the Yankees have a payroll about seven times that of the Florida Marlins.

Hall of Fame? Give me a break.

Red Sox v Nationals

2010-12-06T00:04:00.000-05:00

One of the many things I "enjoy" is the annual handing out of deals, in MLB, that are instantly bad.

Not "good for a couple years then turn bad", not "could be good if everything goes right, but it doesn't, so it goes bad"...just instantly and momentously stupid.

Jayson Werth signed a 7 year 127 million dollar deal with the Washington Nationals that is literally, two seconds after being signed, one of the dumbest contracts in Major League Baseball history. It's so beyond stupid that I literally laughed when I heard the number.

Werth will be 32 next May (one month into the season) an age where players typically start to decline...and this marks the 1st year of his seven year deal.

He's played all of TWO full seasons and had one great year.

Now...contrast that to the deal the Boston Red Sox just signed

They got Adrian Gonzalez who is 3 years younger, whose had 4 great years in a row (in a pitchers ballpark) and is a much better defensive player for an extra year at a cost of 41 million more (i.e he signed for 8/167)...

Granted, the Red Sox had to give up players (a bunch of prospects) but that isn't the point...what matters is they got a better/younger player for an annual salary of 20.5 million and the Nationals got an older player likely to decline shortly for 18 million a year.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why the Nationals suck every year and the Red Sox contend...I'd bet any amount you want that Werth has a great 2011, a solid 2012, a mediocre 2013 and is an albatross on the roster for 2014/15/16 and 17.

X-Box modding

2010-12-03T00:04:00.002-05:00

If you haven't heard, a guy who modified an X-Box (which people do in order to add new software not otherwise supported by the system) went to court and eventually had the charges dropped.

Now...it should be very clear...this guy didn't steal any games, he didn't do anything more than change a system that he bought in order to run software that is 100% legitimate.

Now...it's going to be clear, if it isn't already, what side of the debate I fall on.

Microsoft (and Apple and and and) want you to buy their devices but not actually own them. They want you to buy it and then be bound to buy more and more stuff directly from them (see Apple Itunes app store).

The problem is pretty obvious. You own the device. As long as you don't do anything illegal with it, it's very very hard to argue that you are doing anything wrong. And if you are doing something illegal with it, that's a job for the cops.

I thought it would be interesting to highlight the young/old juror comments to show you how thinking has changed.

From Wired:

Jurors, who heard only one day of testimony, left the courthouse with mixed opinions on the case. “When we left yesterday, I was thinking, ‘What are we doing here?’” said juror Paul Dietz, a 27-year-old actor. He said he “probably would have” acquitted.

Another juror, Jerry Griffin, a 63-year-old trial attorney, said “I think Microsoft has a right to protect its proprietary information.”

I wonder what Jerry would think if I told him he couldn't paint his car purple because he didn't ask GM first...as far as I am concerned...if I own the damn thing, then I will do whatever the hell I want with it!

Cam Newton

2010-12-02T15:40:00.000-05:00

CNNSI - Andy Staples on Cam Newton

If you ever wondered how far into bed people like ESPN or CNNSI are with pro sports, look no further than the latest front page article for CNNSI.

Headline (on main page) "Sins of the Father"

The article is basically full of gems such as:

My son [article author] is 15 months old. If he shows an astounding aptitude for a skill at any point during his formative years, I would never risk his eligibility to express that skill for a quick payday. If I did, I hope he would never speak to me again.

It will be interesting to see if Cecil [Cam's father] accompanies his son to the Heisman Trophy ceremony next week. Will he feel any pride watching his son win the award? Will he feel any shame for ruining his son's name for a few pieces of silver?

Now, in case you aren't aware. Cam Newton is the starting QB at Auburn and his father has been judged guilty by the NCAA for trying to sell his services to another university for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Now...this is important...the entire article rests on one of two beliefs. That a 21 year old who clocks in at 6 foot 6 and 250 pounds was either:

a) unaware that his father was trying to sell his quarterbacking services
b) did know, he couldn't stop it

The NCAA release said no evidence exists to indicate Cam Newton knew of the scheme. Even if he did, could he have stopped it? Think back to when you were Newton's age. Could you have defied your father? Some might have, but most people wouldn't have.

Now, I have to wonder...how fucking stupid does Andy Staples think we are? Really? In 2010 a kid standing up to his father is somehow unrealistic? At 20/21?

One year away from earning millions in the NFL and this kid either was completely unaware his dad wanted hundreds of thousands of dollars for his kid transfering or knew and didn't do anything about it?

All of this is just after that agent (whose name I forget) came out and basically said he paid kids thousands...or after the eight zillion times boosters have paid kids/parents to have them enroll at school X.

I would bet my life that Cam knew and the father was acting as a go-between. Believing anything else just makes you naive.

CNNSI has put out this article to make the dad a rogue and bad guy so you will tune in and cheer as Auburn plays for the national title (wow, what a coincidence that a QB at a title contender doesn't face any sanctions for his father trying to sell his services for hundreds of thousands of dollars)

Best line of the article:

Meanwhile, the NCAA will have to amend its bylaws to close the massive loophole it opened Wednesday or risk becoming a complete joke.

Right, cause the NCAA hasn't been a joke since day 1 anyway.

Darlie toothpaste

2010-12-01T00:04:00.000-05:00

You may have seen or heard about the latest uproar over a Chinese toothpaste that features Al Jolson in blackface, the name of which was Darkie and is now Darlie.

It goes without saying that people are calling for Colgate (who owns the Chinese company) to kill the brand.

Here's the thing. Who decided that America was the bastion of the rules for what is and what isn't offensive?

Like, should all 192 countries on earth have to agree on a product name or logo before a company is allowed to use it? Remember, this toothpaste has ZERO racial connotations in China. It is simply a toothpaste brand.

What people don't seem to want to realize (or understand) is that most things are offensive to somebody. You think the Russians thought "Red Dawn" (the crappy movie) was a wonderful portrayal of Russians? Or Rocky 5 when Rocky ends the cold war by beating a juiced up Russian?

How about "Coon" cheese in Australia where "Coon" is NOT a racial slur like it is in the UK and US?

How many words in the English language are slurs in another?

Do you see what I mean? There is no global agreement on what is acceptable across the board, so trying to enforce American values on a Chinese product sold in China is just absurd.

How about this. Before worrying about Chinese toothpaste sold in China, get your own house in order. I have no doubt that the US has enough shit to worry about (and solve) before going after "issues" like this.

Leverage

2010-11-30T09:41:00.002-05:00

Why is it that something that is so glaringly obvious is never seen as glaringly obvious by anyone in MLB?

Troy Tulowitzki has a 3 year contract...it pays him 5.5, 8.5, and 10 million over the next three seasons. He also had a team option for 15 million for 2014.

So, the team either had him for three years at 31 million or four for 45 million.

Troy has ZERO leverage for a contract extension. 4 years is like an ice age in baseball. He'll go from being 26 to 30 (players typically start their big decline at 32)

What do the Rockies decide to do? Give him a huge contract extension that adds 6 years to the deal that makes the total "close to 160 million"...in other words...they plan to pay a 30 year old shortstop an average of 19 million a year from 30-36.

I guarantee you this is a bad deal. There is ZERO chance this works out well. How many 10 year deals in MLB history have the teams been happy with? Zero!

Congrats to Troy's agent who hoodwinked the GM of the Rockies (who, of course, will have long been fired before he has to deal with the bad years of the contract).

Black Friday Redux

2010-11-29T00:04:00.000-05:00

One of the, not terribly shocking, revelations about the Black Friday/Cyber Monday weekend, for me, has been people's complete and utter lack of understanding as to why stores sell things at a "discount".

I've been, mostly due to boredom, reading the Amazon blog/comments concerning the deals offered on Amazon. They seem to be filled with people who are not impressed with the deals or the quantity of items available (if the deal happens to be good).

Which is really interesting because it shows that people have completely unrealistic expectations regarding how sales work.

An item goes on sale for one of four reasons:

1) They can't sell it at X price so they discount it
2) They make it a loss leader to get you to buy other stuff
3) They want to clear out inventory and can't sell their stock quickly enough at it's current price
4) A newer model is on it's way and they hope to dump items at a mild discount now instead of a big discount later

That's it. What that means, in practice, is that the items you really want are by definition the ones that they can sell at their regular price. There is no reason for the retailer to mark down the latest video game, an ipad, the hottest bag of the season or what have you because they are going to sell it without a discount.

Do you see what I mean? It's not that you can't get bargains but expecting to get the latest and greatest at a deep discount is just silly. It's also silly to expect that they will have unlimited numbers of the "great" items they do have at a discount (see #2).

There is no such thing as a free lunch

Black Friday

2010-11-26T10:09:00.003-05:00

As I write this, people all over the US have been lined up for hours waiting for stores to open so they can flood in and buy stuff they probably don't need at prices that (unless they get a door crasher) aren't much better than they will be on Monday.

One of the fascinating things about our culture is our collective idea that "bargain" is anything cheap, even if we don't actually need the item in question.

For example, I was surfing Amazon and ended up putting a $2 DVD of Goodfellas, a $5 Time Bandits Blu-Ray and on and on...and then it hit me...I don't need a DVD of Time Bandits even if it is $5.

Do you see what I mean? The entire idea of Black Friday is to bet that you, the individual, can outwit the massive corporations that spend billions researching shopping psychology by only buying the things that a) you "need" b) are actually on sale c) leaving the store having "won" by not buying a dozen extra DVD's, books, electronics or other things that you never knew you couldn't live without until they were on sale.

The reality is that 95% of the people lining up will spend more money than they intended to and get far less of a "bargain" than they imagined with the stuff they bring home.

Frankly, I think you're better off staying in bed.

Derek Jeter

2010-11-25T00:04:00.000-05:00

Derek Jeter is currently negotiating the most unique contract in sports history...I can't think of another time where an athlete had a) iconic status for a single team b) no other viable options to sign elsewhere c) no leverage whatsoever d) massive ego e) is wanted back by the team for which they are iconic.

Think about it. Mostly a star faces deep decline and is not asked to return, signs a low dollar value deal elsewhere, sucks and then retires (i.e. Joe Namath, Emmitt Smith) or ends up bouncing around a bunch of teams in the last five years of their career (Shaquille O'Neal, Wayne Gretzky) but never has the original team a) wanted the player back and b) held all the leverage.

You see, Jeter can't go anywhere else. He's a 37 year old sub-average defending shortstop with a declining bat. He might (MIGHT) get 21 million over 3 years on the open market from a big market club.

Seriously, there were 8 teams that spent more than 98 million on salary last year. Do you think any of them want to devote 10% of their salary on a risk like Jeter over the next three years? Do you think the other 22 teams are willing to devote 15-20% of their salary to him?

Would Jeter even be a big draw for anybody else? The San Francisco Giants sure as hell aren't going to suddenly sell thousands more tickets because Jeter is on the roster.

What makes this negotiation so interesting is that Jeter is wired to be loved. He's had 15 years of people bowing to his (sub average) fielding (5 gold gloves), leadership (myth), grit (myth) and great bat...etc..etc...and now he's old and shitty and the team, smartly, knows it holds all the cards and looks willing to use them.

Now, it's clear the deal with get done for way more money than makes any kind of rational sense (I am thinking either 3 years 51 million or 4/60 million) but it will be really interesting to see who blinks first.

Things

2010-11-24T09:47:00.003-05:00

I'm reading an article on MSNBC about smart phones and notice this sub headline.

Pick one of these, and be happy

It's amazing how far over the falls we've gone with the idea that "things" = happy.

That beer will get you babes and you'll be popular, that truck will make you manly, that smartphone will make you hip.

What I find interesting is how few people seem to notice or care that the entire economic system is built around you being a slave. Everything is centered around your getting onto the hamster wheel of buying and then being forced to continue buying until you die.

My favorite example of this is Virgin Mobile in Canada. They offer a system called "smart tab" which is basically a way of avoiding a contract (sort of) buy getting a phone for free and paying for it with 10% of your monthly bill.

In other words, if I spend $50 a month, I get credit for $5 towards the phone. Eventually I will pay off the phone and keep building credit. If I leave the company, I'd have to pay off anything I owed or (obviously) lose any credit I have built up.

The iphone 4 32GB is $270 up front plus $500 in smart tab dues.

Think about that. At $100 a month (pre-tax) on a phone plan, you'd need 50 months (just over 4 years) to get to the point where you would now own your phone.

In other words, you will never ever ever pay it off. The phone will die (who has a phone for more than 4 years today?) and you will be forced to sign up for another phone and owe them more money. Remember, now you are used to having the hip new phone, you are used to having a smart phone and there is no way you are going to go back to a cheap brick phone.

And they own your ass.

Sound like happiness to you?

Desire

2010-11-23T00:04:00.000-05:00

I missed out on meeting Tim Burton (the director) today. I heard he was signing his art books early this afternoon and rushed downtown to line up for his (short) signing but arrived too late and was told that, although I could line up if I chose, the likelihood of me getting a book signed in the time allotted was zero.

I was disappointed, came home in a bit of a funk and felt kinda silly for rushing downtown only to turn right around and come back.

Except that the reality is that he'd have signed a book, it would have gone in a storage tub and probably seen the light of day on rare occasions.

My point is that it is amazing how much we can want something whose actual possession means very little in the long run. I smile when I think of the signed Slap Shot poster that Yvon Barrette signed for me or the Revenge of the Nerds poster Donald Gibb signed but would I be traumatized if the Denis Leary poster went missing?

Do you see what I mean? We are a culture of people conditioned to want, feel briefly satisfied and then move on to the next potential "thing" we MUST have in order to be happy.

My thought is this. Next time you think about acquiring something, ask yourself how many things you currently own that you would trade for the amount you paid for them.

I'd still like to have met Tim Burton but I am not sure how much I really need one of his books signed.

Postsecret

2010-11-22T10:46:00.003-05:00

If you are unaware, Postsecret is a blog/series of books where people mail in their "secrets" to Frank and he posts some weekly, some in books.

So, this week I surfed the site and found this appeal from the website owner:

A Personal Appeal from Frank

Each PostSecret book sold earns me $1.50 - $2.50. That doesn't sound like much but it can go a long way to help cover the projects costs, since I've always kept the Blog ad-free.

Along with live speaking events, book royalties allow me to support my very understanding family and keep the website alive for a sixth year, that's a total of over 300 Sundays!

I hope you'll consider buying one or all five of the PostSecret books this holiday season for yourself or as gifts. Of course the other way you can support the project is by mailing in your secrets. :)

Now, before I start I think it's important to throw in a couple bullet points

- I read Postsecret weekly
- I think it's a brilliant idea
- I wish I'd thought of it

Ok...good...because this "appeal" is the absolute height of bullshit...a mountain of crap so huge that you can see it for miles.

Let's deconstruct.

1 - Costs

What, exactly, does Postsecret cost Frank every year? He used to run it off blogger (which is free) and now has a domain name (but still runs it off blogger...still free)

People pay to mail in their own "secrets".

In other words, if I were to run the site under the same conditions, it MIGHT cost me $50 a year. So the idea of the site being "ad-free" as if that's some hardship is absurd.

(This is aside from the initial 3000 postcards he bought when he started...so maybe $5000 in startup costs?)

2 - The "Project"

Postsecret, I hate to tell you, is a for profit enterprise designed to make Frank a living. It is not a "project", it is not some social good, it's not research, it's reality tv in the form of postcards.

3 - The truth

According to the Freakanomics blog, Postsecret has sold 4 million copies (all books totaled). By Frank's own math above...that's 6-10 MILLION in earnings for him. Not counting any revenue from live speaking events.

In other words, by his own admission, he makes more than a million dollars a year running a blog that updates weekly with content entirely created and paid for by you.

So, enjoy Postsecret if you like (I do) but take Frank's "appeals" for the bullshit they are. Frank makes shitloads of money doing a job that I could manage in five hours a week or less.

Being ad-free isn't a sacrifice, it's a business decision that has paid off handsomely.

How not to run a business

2010-11-19T00:04:00.000-05:00

I decided to buy an exercise bike...going to the gym wasn't happening and I figured I could set it up in my living room and bike during tv watching...so I found a bike I liked, asked all the questions about warranties and service and delivery and ordered it.

The warranty was 15 years on the frame, 3 parts and 1 labor.

I get the invoice and it says "$30 fee to arrange service". So I emailed the rep and said something like "umm, you never mentioned any fee to arrange service in any of the dozen emails back and forth and the warranty says that labor is included!"

The response was basically that this was their fee and they weren't willing to put a note on my account to wave it and refunded the sale.

Now, I want you to think about this.

1) This fee only comes into place if I need service, meaning that they turned down a sale rather than agree not to charge a fee that might never be necessary.

2) They engaged in a deceptive trade practice (it's not legal to impose fees on a contract after the purchase has been made)

3) Not only would I never deal with them again, I will recommend against anyone else dealing with them.

What's baffling is just how stupid the whole thing is. You never ever try to nickel and dime a customer after the deal has been made. It's a great way to lose customers and piss people off.

Deford a blowhard

2010-11-18T09:11:00.000-05:00

You may have seen the middle school football trick play where the center casually hands the football to the QB who literally walks through the opposing defensive line (who stand around baffled) until he (the QB) takes off and runs for a touchdown.

Frank Deford thinks thinks the following: "No, it was only the other team's kids who were embarrassed and belittled by a children's coach being a wise guy, a bully of sorts. It wasn't genius at all. Sure, it was legal, but it wasn't fair. Laugh at kids being outslicked by a grown-up, and you're cruel. That isn't sport."

Now I have a number of points here:

1) Isn't middle school coaching pretty much always an adult creating strategy for children? I mean, it's not like this coach is somehow an aberration, it's always his role to create strategy and plays to outslick the other coach's kids.

2) Isn't there opportunity for learning here? Like, be mindful of what's going on? Watch for trickery? etc..etc... I'd bet that the kids fooled by this will be more vigilant next time, and isn't that a good thing?

3) Is it really that horrible of an experience to have a trick play, played on you? It's not like the coach laughed at the kids, called them stupid and slapped them on the head. He wrote up a legal play that happened to be unconventional and which worked.

4) Don't we create a nation of sissies if we whine about things like this? Don't we diminish the ability of kids to learn and grow when we decide that events like these should never happen because somebody might feel bad?

To me, this is the same thing as giving everyone a trophy at little league...it just sets kids up for crushing failure later on when they realize that finished 10th doesn't get you any awards in real life.

Anyway, I enjoyed watching the trick play and bet that years from now the kids on the other side will enjoy the memory and benefit from the lessons they learned.

The Problem with the TSA

2010-11-17T00:04:00.000-05:00

The TSA is getting a lot of flak right now due to it's scanning machines (lack of privacy, radiation exposure, illegal saving of images) and pat down procedures (being molested).

However, the problem is not the TSA or even the government, the problem is you and me.

Did you know who Mike Brown was before hurricane Katrina? Of course not. The (former) head of FEMA was forced to resign after the agency acted slowly in reacting to a once in a lifetime disaster.

Mike Brown, and I have no idea if he's smart or not, was supposed to react to disaster unlike the country had ever seen across about a hundred government agencies in ten seconds at a moment's notice in one of the biggest countries on the planet.

When he failed, and I guarantee you anyone in his position would have failed, he was ridiculed and ousted.

Which brings me back to the TSA

The costs of failure for the head of the TSA are exactly the same as for Mike Brown (a formerly faceless bureaucrat).

So, what does a rational TSA chief do? They put in these scanners which are win-win.

- If the public accepts them, they offer new (and invasive) ways to make planes safer. They likely slow down security lines meaning more staff are needed (and more power for the TSA chief running a bigger agency)

- If the public doesn't accept them, the chief has an easy out if somebody boards a plane and does something horrible. "Well, we TRIED to put in these scanners and YOU told us to stop using them, we would have caught these horrible guys if we'd had the scanners" he would say.

In other words, the goal of the TSA is not to stop terrorism. It's to make it look like they are trying to stop terrorism and hope (pray) bad guys are caught through other agencies (FBI, CIA etc..) or nobody tries to blow up/steal a plane on their watch.

If I ran the TSA, I'd probably be telling the public that strip searches were the way to go, no way I'd set myself up for a public roasting a la Mike Brown.

How did Daniel Snyder become rich?

2010-11-16T00:04:00.000-05:00

One of the many baffling things about rich people is how ungodly stupid they seem to become once they move into ventures outside of what made them successful.

It's like the ability to succeed is tempered by an astounding lack of self awareness as to what skills they possess (or not)

Or put another way...what possible rationale was there for the Washington Redskins to sign soon to be 35 year old quarterback Donovan McNabb to a huge new contract with 40 million guaranteed.

Here are the questions I would ask when approaching a negotiation like this:

1) What are the odds a player who is going to be almost 36 on opening day next year is going to play at a high level?

2) Who is my competition in signing this player?

3) What are the consequences of a bad contract?

Now...the answers are pretty clear...

1) Not good
2) Nobody else was going to pay McNabb 40 million guaranteed
3) Money out the window, possible cap effects (depending on the CBA)

In other words, Snyder gave an old and mediocre quarterback a contract that nobody else in the league would have and one that will almost certainly come back to bite him in the ass.

Does he have nobody on staff to tell him this shit? Has he not learned from any of the zillion other high priced and old free agents he signed and who performed like crap?

I just don't get it.

Oh and at time of writing, the 'skins are getting killed by Philly and will almost certainly go 4-5 on the season...McNabb is being thoroughly mediocre 5/9 with one td and one pick...

Simpsons phoning it in

2010-11-15T21:56:00.002-05:00

Quickie

On Sunday we saw a new Simpsons episode...or did we?

Lisa decides she doesn't want to become like Marge and ends up changing schools until she finds out that Marge has secretly made a deal to do the school's laundry in return for admission.

Bart is worried about a bully (Nelson) but makes peace.

Ummm...didn't we see these before?

-Homer buys Lisa a pony and works three jobs to pay for it's food until Lisa finds out and she decides she can't let him continue to do that for her.

-Lisa envies another school (military academy) and asks to switch before becoming disillusioned and quits to go back to Springfield Elementary.

-Lisa is worried about becoming stupid so Marge brings in all her smart female relatives to show her what she is capable of becoming

-Bart faces off against Nelson a million different ways

Seriously...this "new" episode is basically old ones cobbled together...pathetic.

Verducci = still an idiot

2010-11-15T00:04:00.005-05:00

It is not some great travesty that a 36-year-old shortstop with diminishing range won the award. I've seen coaches fill out ballots. They are not poring over advanced fielding metrics. They want guys who they see as reliable. And as one coach told me, Jeter is extremely reliable at every phase of defense -- a sure-handed fielder and accurate thrower who also is excellent at relays, tags, pop-ups, double plays, decision-making and positioning.

But the Gold Glove Award is unlike most awards because of who votes and why. It is a coach's award and Jeter is a coach's player.

(Tom Verducci - professional sportswriter)

If that statement wasn't clear, let me translate.

It's not a travesty that a sub mediocre shortstop won the golf glove because cliche, cliche, unsubstantiated cliche, and cliche.

What infuriates people the most about writers like Verducci or broadcasters like Joe Morgan (yay, fired!) is how they continue to justify idiotic decisions by using worthless "measures" as if they have any actual value.

God help us.

Derek Jeter is an awful awful fielding shortstop...by virtually any measurement he's awful...there is no rational argument to give him a gold glove...none...I can't say this enough...the above statement is so absurd, Verducci might as well be calling the world flat...

We've made a lot of headway in dispelling the myths of modern baseball (wins are a horrible way to evaluate pitchers, saves are a ridiculous statistic, clutch hitting does not exist and on and on), I only hope that guys like Verducci go away and let people who actually understand the sport, write about it.

Sports Illustrated Sportsmen

2010-11-12T00:29:00.002-05:00

Every year Sports Illustrated goes through this ridiculous charade of having all of it's writers do a piece on which athlete they feel should be the "Sportsman" of the year. By amazing coincidence, none of these guys pick the same athlete and so we are treated to a deluge of (usually) "the dominant athlete in the sport I happen to cover should win because..." puff pieces.

Taking the cake already this year is Jack McCallum who decided that the main reason why Roy Halladay should win is because he decided not to appear on David Letterman.

Hunh?

Let me get this straight:

a) The appearance would mean leaving his team in mid playoff series to fly to New York to do the show

b) It assumes that Roy gives a crap about doing another puff interview (remember, Roy is a multi-multi-multi millionaire athlete who gets interviewed a zillion times a year...is it really reasonable to think he gives a shit about a Letterman appearance?)

c) It assumes that at the end of a long season and just having thrown a no-hitter he really wants to get on another fucking plane and deal with the hassle for a 5 minute appearance

d) It ascribes a positive value to a guy who ops NOT to promote his sport! You really think MLB would rather he stay home or promote baseball by appearing on television?

e) It assumes he's an interesting/charismatic interview (I've never seen him interviewed, so I have no idea what he's like in front of the camera)

It just doesn't seem terribly "Wow, I can't believe he did that" to believe that a tired pitcher worth zillions really cares about being invited on a show whose average viewer is 50 and might (might) hit 4 million people on a good night.

Stephen Fry and Women

2010-11-11T00:04:00.000-05:00

Stephen Fry, the British Comedian, came out and said some controversial things about women. Namely that they (paraphrasing) don't like sex, have sex in order to have a relationship (i.e. the price they pay). His evidence is that women don't troll for sex the way gay men do.

A number of points.

1) What is the risk/reward at this point to anybody famous doing an interview? Seriously, interviews are pretty much a death trap at this point. Either the interview is bland and uninteresting and nobody cares or the celebrity says something stupid.

2) Why do people feel like they are experts on things they know nothing about? Stephen Fry is a) gay b) has no evidence of his claims. In other words, why would anyone care what he thinks about women's sexuality when he clearly has no idea what he's talking about.

3) Why do we even care what celebrities think? I am always mystified at the people who follow Suzanne Somers or Tom Cruise or any of these nutbags who know absolutely nothing about the subjects they rant on about.

You wouldn't take plumbing advice from me so why would you base medical treatment or your beliefs on what a celebrity says.

4) Celebrities should learn to keep their mouths shut.

Don Banks needs logic lesson

2010-11-10T00:04:00.000-05:00

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/don_banks/11/09/overtime.rules/index.html?eref=sihp

One of the many things that grate on my nerves is the lack of anything resembling an understanding of statistics or common sense amongst sportwriters.

The NFL, quite reasonably, made a change to the overtime rules for the playoffs. Starting this year, each team will be guaranteed at least one possession in overtime assuming the team with the ball first doesn't score a touchdown.

The idea makes total sense, nobody wants a Superbowl decided with a kickoff to the 30, a 40 yard pass and a long field goal.

Don Banks, however, feels that because only one game so far in the 2010 season has had an overtime end with only one team having possession, the rule change isn't necessary.

God, where to start:

1) 11 games isn't a big enough sample size

2) There are lots of rules in the NFL that are rarely needed but that doesn't mean they are never needed

3) A rule that only comes into effect in the PLAYOFFS can't be determined to be useless until we've had a fucking playoff season with it in place!

4) The idea that a bunch of multi-millionaire coaches can't figure out a simple rule and will be flummoxed in the playoffs is the height of absurdity. A four year old could make the right decision (not to mention that a field goal attempt in overtime is almost always the result of that being the singular option)

GRRR...these arguments are so frustrating to debunk...at least ESPN finally wised up and fired know-nothing Joe Morgan.

Rant Guy Bits

2010-11-09T10:11:00.003-05:00

http://healthland.time.com/2010/11/06/trick-or-treat-oregon-couple-handed-out-condoms-to-mixed%C2%A0reviews/?xid=rss-topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Ftopstories+%28TIME%3A+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

An Oregan couple raised hackles when they gave out condoms at Halloween...to a 14 year old girl...and responded (paraphrasing) that they normally ask for age and only if the kids are 16 or older do they give them condoms and a sex talk.

Lord, so many things wrong with this:

1) Who the hell trick or treats at 16?
2) Anyone who trick or treats at 16 probably isn't having much sex
3) Are people really this stupid (don't answer that), I mean who the hell wakes up and thinks "hmmm, we could give out candy like everyone else, but let's give out condoms and sex talks, nobody could possibly have a problem with that!"

Here's the deal. Give out candy, period. No apples, no homemade baked goods, no condoms, no lessons, candy or don't bother.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/steve_rushin/10/27/world.champs/index.html?eref=sihp

Steve Rushin makes the oldest (and least funny/interesting) argument in the book that the "World Series" isn't really a "World" event.

For fuck's sake. Is MLB the best league in the world? Unquestionably. Can anyone worldwide be good enough to be drafted/signed and play in MLB? Of course.

So, the league takes players from around the world and is without a doubt the best baseball league (by a mile) in the world. '

Just because teams don't happen to play in London or Sydney doesn't make a sport international. It is the World Series, grow up and write about something interesting.

Pearlman redux (again)

2010-11-08T00:04:00.002-05:00

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/jeff_pearlman/11/05/merriman/index.html?eref=sihp

Pealman's latest...are you ready for this?

Buffalo is cold. San Diego isn't.

I know...I'll hold on while you catch your breath...shocking news in 2010 that a north east city on a lake has weather that is different than a city on the other side of the country...but this is why we need sports writers.

The entire sum of the piece is that a player changing teams (in this case released and picked off waivers) will experience, gasp, weather shock going from sunny San Diego to not so sunny Buffalo.

Deep stuff, people.

The best part...Pearlman digs up Bruce Mathison...yes, that's right...Bruce Matheson only 23 years removed from the NFL where in five years he went 2-9 as a QB and completed less than half his passes.

Here is the conversation I imagine happening:

Jeff: Hi Bruce, it's Jeff Pearlman from CNNSI
Bruce: Ummm ok, what can I do for you?

Jeff: I am doing this deep and insightful piece on how San Diego is different than Buffalo and since you were released by San Diego after two years where you threw all of five passes and ended up being picked up by the Bills, I thought you would be very quotable for this piece.
Bruce: Really? I mean, my own kids don't care that I played in the NFL...you do know I sucked right?...that I am the very definition of a scrub?...and this was like a quarter century ago?

Jeff: You're my hero
Bruce: Ok...Buffalo is cold...San Diego isn't...that quotable enough?

I mean, really, this is the epitome of "puff piece" but there hasn't been anybody in the last quarter century who went from San Diego to Buffalo who has a higher profile than Bruce Mathison?...or maybe Jeff has all the gravitas of a sponge and Bruce was the only one who'd talk to him.

Puff pieces can be fun...stupid puff pieces are better left in the virtual trash bin.

Rant Guy on Vacation - Back Nov 8

2010-11-01T00:04:00.000-04:00

Going back to the old blog, I think I've posted five times a week for more than two years straight without a break...over the past few weeks it's felt like more of a chore to write than usual and so I am taking a week off to recharge...I'll be back Monday November 8th.

overweight = 'aesthetically displeasing'?

2010-10-29T00:04:00.001-04:00

A Marie Claire blogger is being vilified for her comments in regards to "Mike and Molly" (a sitcom about a very heavy couple.

In her own words:

“Yes, I think I'd be grossed out if I had to watch two characters with rolls and rolls of fat kissing each other ... because I'd be grossed out if I had to watch them doing anything,” she writes in her post. “To be brutally honest, even in real life, I find it aesthetically displeasing to watch a very, very fat person simply walk across a room — just like I'd find it distressing if I saw a very drunk person stumbling across a bar or a heroine[sic] addict slumping in a chair.”

What I find funny about the reaction is the complete and utter lack of reality. My first reaction was "d'uh".

Here is the real problem. Fat people (and I could lose about 50lbs so I am not some thin type bashing fat people) want to believe that there are no consequences to being fat. They want everyone to look at them the same way they'd look at anyone else. They don't want to have any problems dating (who does) etc...etc...

Except that being fat does have consequences and there is a good reason why swimsuit calendars aren't filled with 300 lb women...so let's get off this "being fat is ok" bullshit self-esteem driven trip we are on and get our butts moving to lose that weight.

No post again

2010-10-28T00:04:00.000-04:00

I was planning on writing a post but I have a blaring headache and have to help a friend move tomorrow and have dinner with my parents...so back on Friday!

Verducci = idiot

2010-10-27T14:35:00.002-04:00

Fun post today from Tom Verducci who gets snarky with...himself?

He posts 10 questions about the World Series and provides no indication the questions were written by anyone other than himself.

10. Aren't we due for a slugfest or two in this series?

Have you been watching this season?

Well, yes, I have and that's why nobody is asking this fucking question! It's like when sports talk radio says "The people who say Roy Halladay is awful are idiots" without mentioning that nobody has said that.

So, you are basically asking a question that nobody asked and getting snarky with yourself. Awesome.

The NCAA is pure absurity

2010-10-27T00:26:00.003-04:00

The NCAA, in the wake of a former agent coming forward and basically showing that it's routine for players to be paid cash by prospective agents, is not considering fining players into their pro career if they get caught.

Sigh.

The thing is that it's clear to everyone that the NCAA is a sham. Profitable sports (i.e football) bring massive revenue for schools and coaches and the players are "rewarded" with year to year scholarships that can be canceled at any time (pretty much) if they fail to perform.

It is also clear that the market tends to react to (and solve) issues. In other words, players play for free so agents give them money. It doesn't happen in the NFL because players are paid well and agents couldn't compensate players enough to make the payment worthwhile. I.e a guy making 3 million a year isn't going to care about $5,000 and it wouldn't make sense for the agent to pay huge sums because his/her commission is about 3%.

In other words, the solution is for the NCAA to make paying players no longer a reasonable option and that only happens when they stop promoting the absurd notion (and romantic ideal) of "amateur competition".

Pay the players!

Day Off - No Post

2010-10-26T10:13:00.001-04:00

Having kids at 68

2010-10-25T00:02:00.003-04:00

One of the many things that bother me is our increasing narcissism. On that note, Celine Dion (42) and husband Rene (68) had two more kids.

What is it with old people deciding to have babies? Is there anything more selfish than pretty much guaranteeing you are going to be dead before the kids have a real chance to get to know you and/or benefit from your experiences/wisdom?

Rene will be 80 and the kids (she had twins) still won't be teenagers...he'd be 90 by the time they finish university...his life expectancy is about 78 meaning he will die when the kids are 10.

Think about that...the absolute best case scenario for the 10 year old kids is to have a mother going through menopause and a father who certainly isn't going to have the stamina necessary to deal with 10 year old's...wow, ideal scenario that.

The problem is that people believe they can have everything...they want think that having kids in their forties is a snap (hint: it isn't)...that it's never too late (hint: it is)...and that the world somehow owes them every wish fulfilled (hint: it doesn't)

So, how about this, how about we grow up a little as a society and realize that maybe, just maybe, having kids at 68 is just too fucking old.

The middle east

2010-10-22T00:04:00.000-04:00

One of the many reasons peace will never be achieved in the Middle East is that the West has basically nothing in common with the Arab world. Frankly, Arabs might as well be martians at this point.

Look at this series of quotes and tell me I am wrong.

"A...and a...old boy in Syria have become engaged, according to local reports Thursday.

The boy, who was identified only as Khalid, "fell in love" with Hala during a family trip to a seaside town, his father said.

"Khalid told me and his mother that he would like to have stayed with Hala or bring her home to Homs. The young bride seems very genuine,"

Juma told the Gulf News that the[y]...had exchanged rings

Pretty normal right? Well, Khalid is 5 and Hala is 3.

I am not shitting you here. Four actual "adults" decided that because a fucking five year old missed his three year old friend they should get married when he turns 15 and she turns 13.

Do you see my point? How do you make peace or even have a reasonable conversation when somebodies values are so completely out of whack with your definition of sanity.

I read articles like this and think the parents are insane and should have their kids taken away from them. Syrians probably read this and say "wow, they were lucky Khalid got a bride at the ripe old age of 5, he was in real danger of being a bachelor forever if he didn't find somebody soon".

All of these countries are stuck in the stone age (yes, I am saying that my values as a westerner are right and theirs are wrong...getting engaged at the age of three is insane) and we're supposed to sit across the table and be reasonable with them?

I am not sure how you reach common ground with people whose values you find abhorrent.

1 in 6 bullied regularly...or are they?

2010-10-21T00:04:00.000-04:00

As always on this blog, I aim to point out the flaws in surveys so that you can have a more accurate picture of reality and not the misleading claims the media tends to focus on...

Today is the report that 1 in 6 kids is regularly bullied.

So the details are that "regularly" is defined as 2 to 3 times per month. Now, I have huge questions here:

1) Define bullying

Is being told you're a loser bullying? Shoved up against a locker? laughed at?

My aim here is not to defend bullies but to make sure that whomever did the study understands that a loose definition of bullying could make this report meaningless (of course, given that the goal of the survey is to grab headlines and thus research money, it was pretty much inevitable that they would come back with a 1/6 type number)

Remember, when you survey 500,000 kids you aren't talking to them, you are handing them a one page piece of paper and asking them to fill it out. Which means that it almost certainly means that each kid is left to determine what constitutes "bullying".

2) Defined a bullying incident

Do you see what I am getting at? Is being laughed at twice a month for ten seconds enough to be considered a kid who is bullied with regularity? Is that type of incident being measured with far more severe ones? (the answer is "apparently")

In short...do I believe that 1/6 are really bullied on a regular basis? No, I think 1/6 kids is going through normal peer interactions.

What is the number of kids who are being bullied in that systematic, dehumanizing, horrible way that needs to be addressed? I have no idea, but I doubt very much that it's 17% of kids across America.

I want you, as always, to attack everything critically. Remember, this study never sees the light of day if it shows that 1/217 is bullied 2-3 times per month. The university wants published papers, the researchers want published papers and new research grants and the media wants an interesting headline. Everybody has a vested interest in the loosest possible definition of "bullying" to make sure the numbers are as high as possible...without seeing the actual survey, I wouldn't trust it for two seconds.

Jodie Foster thinks Mel Gibson is great

2010-10-20T00:04:00.000-04:00

Jodie Foster came out and said that Mel Gibson is "the most loved man in the film business."

There are two possibilities:

1) She wants good promotion for the film that, big coincidence, is being released (at some point) that has both her and him in it ("The Beaver").
2) She's crazy

I can't think of another option.

I mean, Ms Foster does undertstand that Mel is a Jew hating, wife roughing up, drunk right?

This really isn't a full blog post but I am baffled at the lack of cost/benefit that people exhibit on a regular basis. What does Jodie Foster have to gain by coming out in support of somebody who is pretty well reviled at this point in his life/career? Does she really believe that the radical craziness of Mel's father includes acceptance of gays (Foster is a lesbian)?

I just don't get it. The film they were both in doesn't have a release date pretty much because Mel Gibson's public image is shit and the studio is, I would imagine, worried that people don't want to cough up $$ to go see the Jew hating, wife beating, drunk on a Saturday night.

Jodie did the film and got paid, she can't possibly do her own career any good by trying to delude the public by saying Mel is some sort of universally loved Saint.

Is Multi-Culturalism a failure?

2010-10-19T00:04:00.000-04:00

The German Chancellor came out and said that multi-culturalism has failed in Germany and she is taking flak...which is kind of funny, in a way, because I think she's bang on.

How many countries are there in 2010? 195 by most counts.
How many countries were there in 1959? 106 by most counts.

So, we've globalized, we have internet, I can get from LA to Sydney in 13 hours and the number of generally recognized countries on earth has doubled?

It's not like we discovered 89 heretofore hidden places on the planet. What happened is that groups of people (generally cohesive ethnic or religious groups) decided they wanted to run their own affairs and split off into new states.

Or even at a micro-level...what percentage of your friends are a different ethnic group than you are?

I grew up in a city that is about 50% "white" and only 13/90 of my Facebook friends are non-white.

So, what does that mean for multi-culturalism? Well, it would seem to mean that we love to eat different cuisines, experience other cultures but socialize within our own and be governed by people who look like us and have the same values.

Let me take a different approach. As you know, I lived in Australia for awhile and noticed something really interesting over the course of my journey there. Most of the foreigners I know wanted to stay when they first arrived and yet almost none have (I'd have stayed and would be on a plane tomorrow if I had an Australian passport).

What does that mean? Well, it means that people who intrigued by "different" and then yearn for their own culture when it comes down to the choice of leaving or staying.

In other words, ask yourself why every city has a "Chinatown" or a "Little Italy" and you'll see that people don't want to get involved with other cultures other than on a superficial level and it's very likely that if push came to shove, you would make decisions that benefited your own culture/ethnicity first.

So, yah, I think multi-culturalism is not only dead, it never existed in the first place.

Red light = Job at risk

2010-10-18T00:04:00.001-04:00

Earlier this year "Everything, Everywhere" a phone company made up of "Orange" and "T-Mobile" in the UK brought 1200 people (in groups of 30-60) into big rooms and showed them either a green, yellow or red light.

Green means your job was safe, yellow and you had to re-apply for your old job and red basically meant you were being fired.

The media, of course, hopped on this and there is vast disgust over the level of humanity required (i.e. not much) to do this to people.

Here's the thing.

They don't care about you and I fail to see why this shocks anybody. I mean, how do you dump somebody in 2010? Do you:

a) Take them out for coffee and tell them in person
b) Call them
c) Text them
d) Change your Facebook Status to "single" and ignore them

I gotta tell you that we, as a society, are leaning way towards "d". So why do people expect the relationship with your employer to be any different?

How many meetings have I been in when my benefits were "enhanced" (made worse)? How many times have I been told the bonus structure was "revised to our benefit" (made worse) or the company was "re-organizing" (people getting fired).

This is the world we live in. The second we decided that buying cheap shit made in other countries was more important than anything else, we decided that high employment in Western countries didn't matter. When we decide to shop on price over any other consideration, we decided we didn't want staffed customer service counters.

"Everything, Everywhere" is doing the exact same thing most people do when they dump somebody. They just wanted them to go away as quickly as possible and with as little fuss as possible.

You can't have it both ways. It's either cheap crap from overseas and companies wanting to exchange expensive western labor for cheap overseas labor and buying more expensive stuff.

And "we" clearly voted for the latter.

Bill Simmons - Edgy as a butter knife

2010-10-15T13:54:00.003-04:00

I am still horribly sick but will do a quickie today.

Bill Simmons is proving to have the gravitas of a sponge at the moment. His last two columns have concerned a mistaken tweet about the Patriots/Vikings deal (i.e Randy Moss) and, ready for this one, the 32 NBA teams ranked by how much he wants to watch them this year.

Now, as I wrote previously, the media is the only group that cares about who got the scoop. So, when I see comments like:

Who cares? It's not like we have some giant scoreboard keeping track of everything. But my reporter friends all say the same thing: It's not about one scoop but the entire body of scoops (not just for the reporter, but the company that employs them). Think of Ichiro grinding out 200 hits every season. Yeah, most of them are mundane singles … but they add up. For readers, that volume turns it into a "feel" thing.

From Simmons, it's clear that he (and the rest of the media) have no idea what their readers actually care about. It seems far fetched that readers read people because of their record on scoops. Given the speed of the internet, everyone is going to be reporting on the story within minutes and "first" is basically meaningless.

His most recent column is the height of laziness (and/or inability to come up with something to write about)...he ranks the teams he wants to see over the course of the NBA season.

Wow...is Bill going to be writing power rankings next? I can't think of a subject that takes less work than this type of "column".

Could he have written about the NCAA scandal brewing where a former agent basically came out and said that agents paying players is routine? could he have written about Favre/Sterger?

Almost anything would have been preferable to the two worthless columns he's put out this week.

It seems clear that either ESPN has shackled him to the point where he can't say anything interesting or he just doesn't have any ideas left.

Am sick - no posting

2010-10-14T00:04:00.000-04:00

Have the flu...feel like death...unlikely to post on Thursday...

Wear purple to stop bullying

2010-10-13T00:04:00.002-04:00

One of the wonders of the modern age is the capacity of people to delude themselves. It seems like every single day I see a new ribbon or wrist-band that is supposed to represent your "action" for a given cause.

October 20th is apparently "stop bullying of homosexuals day"? The idea is we are all supposed to wear purple and, I guess, the point is that this is going to do something?

Let me put this bluntly. Wearing purple on October 20th probably couldn't be more pointless if it tried. This "action" will have zero effect on bullying of homosexuals. Why? Because the people who wear purple aren't the fucking bullies!

Do you think that a father of a 12 year old is going to teach his kid tolerance because people wore purple for a day? Do you think that people who hate homosexuals are going to think twice because people wore purple? Really?

So, do me a favor, on October 20th ignore this ridiculous "wear purple" idea and wear whatever you want. Wearing purple is a feel good gesture for people who don't actually care enough to try and make a real difference.

You really care about homosexuals killing themselves?...volunteer at your local school...volunteer at a suicide hotline...coach a youth league...sign up to mentor a young person...but don't wear purple and be proud of yourself...because all that says is you don't care enough to actually do anything that might have an impact.

Jenn Sterger - Brett Favre

2010-10-12T00:04:00.006-04:00

As you may know, Deadspin published an article with voice-mails and pictures reputed to come from Brett Favre and sent to Jenn Sterger.

Both the voice-mails and pictures (of his "member") would constitute sexual harassment under pretty much any definition and Favre is facing an NFL investigation that could lead to a fine or suspension.

What I find interesting is the uncomfortable truths this case leads us to:

1) Who the victim is, matters.

If Jenn Sterger was a nun, this would have been reported miles quicker and would be subject to far more scrutiny than it is. Why? Jenn Sterger is basically famous because she has fantastic breasts and men want to fuck her. Period.

If she were flat chested, she'd never have been photographed while at a Florida State game and would never have any of the publicity oriented opportunities that led to her job working for the NY Jets.

I think the issue, quite frankly, is that people say to themselves "if you use your breasts to get a job, then you have to expect people aren't going to treat you as a professional"...is that right? Probably not, but pretty much every recent sexual harassment type case has centered around a hot woman doing a job that she got solely because she's hot and people treating her without any respect.

I don't think people have any sympathy for the victim in this case and that changes the coverage and public perception.

2) Brett Favre is popular

How quick was ESPN to report or comment on the allegations? Not very. Who pays the NFL massive amounts of money to broadcast NFL games? I wonder.

It's incidents like this that should make you very aware of the conflict of interest that ESPN faces every single day. Taking a popular, and white, player and reporting that he's allegedly sent pictures of his dick to an NFL employee isn't good for the league and possibly not good (long term) for ratings.

ESPN has every incentive to report only what is in its best interest to report and the public should be very aware that when ESPN pays the NFL to broadcast games, they are no longer independent news, they are in bed with the NFL.

Creepy Guys

2010-10-11T00:04:00.002-04:00

I have friends who cross the ages of about 20-39 (I am 35)...I like a lot of different kinds of people and find that they all add something different to my life...However, having some "younger" friends means I get stories likes the ones I am about to relate.

One of my friends is twenty, sweet and very pretty...and every time we hang out I get the latest on the creepy guys who hit on her.

What I have found really amusing (she can take care of herself and so I don't feel terribly outraged on her behalf...but would certainly have words with anyone who ever tried to hurt her) is the tactics these guys use.

In other words...is it really worth the cost of your dignity to proposition a woman 14 years younger than you by asking her, when you've hung out a couple times, to go on vacation with you? I mean, what are the odds she is going to say yes to that?

Is it just a creepy guy gene that prevents them from understanding that women don't find it flattering to be asked out by people who have never had a conversation with them?

Look, I realize that creepy guys may not be tops in the social skills department but this isn't rocket science. Women may well be cuddlier, softer, and smell better than men, they also aren't stupid. They aren't fooled when you invite them over so you can draw them naked, they aren't fooled when you offer to pay for them to come out, they certainly aren't fooled by your lame ass attempts to seduce her.

So, not only is the woman rejecting your sorry ass but she's telling her friends who are laughing at you...so don't be creepy!

The rewards of meeting somebody wonderful are far greater than continually embarrassing yourself trying to somehow dupe a woman (who knows better) into bed with you...and I won't have to kick your ass if you push it too far.

Coldhardfootballfacts.com - Riiiight.

2010-10-08T00:04:00.000-04:00

Sigh.

Yes, sigh.

As I continue my unending battle against stupidity I now go against coldhardfootballfacts.com which proves to be nothing like it's domain name. I think they should rename themselves as unabletounderstandstatisticalanaysiswesuck.com

Let me give you a scenario.

I drive from New York to Boston in June with my buddy Bob and get X miles per gallon. In December, I take my buddy Jeff to Buffalo and get Y miles per gallon.

Would anyone but an idiot compare X and Y and make the argument that Bob makes my car more fuel efficient?

The argument that Kerry Byrne tries to foist on an unsuspecting public is the idea that Randy Moss makes the Patriots worse. He attempts to do this by comparing apples and oranges and trying to tell you they are both apples.

In other words, comparing X and Y is about eliminating every single other variable in order to have a true comparison. Was the car the same? Was it maintained the same? Excluding Jeff and Bob what was the weight of the car? What were road conditions? Highway vs city driving? and on and on.

So when you compare the pre-Randy Moss Patriots to the Randy Moss Patriots you simply cannot take Randy Moss as the only difference and declare he is the cause of anything because there are a million other things that have changed.

Take this gem of a quote:

So which was the better playoff team? The club that went 12-2, won three Super Bowls and averaged 25.3 PPG; or the club that went 2-2, won zero Super Bowls and averaged 20.8 PPG? The answer is obvious.

Right...it is obvious...that the TEAM was better...is it obvious that Randy Moss is the reason for that "decline"? Of course not.

Maybe they faced stronger teams, maybe the Patriots got old, maybe the coaches weren't as good, maybe injuries took more of a toll, maybe they had a tougher schedule...I could go on for pages about the differences between the 2004 and 2007 Patriots...it's likely half the roster was different! Maybe they don't even make the playoffs without Randy Moss.

(I find it highly amusing, as an aside, that if Tyree doesn't make a miracle catch, this article never gets published...a 1/1,000,000 ridiculous catch on a play when the Giants should have been called for holding...twice!...by a guy who has never played in the NFL again is somehow the basis for an argument against Randy Moss)

I don't even want to begin on the utterly absurd idea that wide receivers are window dressing.

His argument is basically this.

The 1960's Packers won 5 titles and didn't have a 1000 yard receiving season by an individual receiver. Which, ignore the statistical silliness of using an arbitrary number to determine receiver value. In other words...you can't say that a lack of a single receiver having at least 1000 yards is meaningful.

The 1970's is the same stupid argument about the Steelers

The 1980's are all about how Jerry Rice (greatest WR of all time) didn't add much to the already Superbowl winning 49'ers with the argument than in 1984 they were a rushing team (we'll ignore that there is no way whatsoever they win the title in 1988 without Rice)

The 1990's is apparently all about the fact that Michael Irvin never caught more than 10 TD's in a season. Umm, you get any feeling here that these guys are cherry picking bullshit stats to make a point? It's not like Michael Irvin is in the hall of fame or anything.

Wide Receivers and the running game go hand in hand...you cannot have a great running game without a deep threat to keep defenses from crowing the box...so the fact that a running back breaks for a 10 yard gain is NOT evidence you don't need a WR!

Just silly stuff from people who profess to know better.

Fabfind - Suckers

2010-10-07T00:04:00.002-04:00

Today I got more people bugging me about Fabfind than any other internet promotion I have seen in a long time.

Apparently, this company called Fabfind was going to be selling $10 ipads.

Now...I want you to stop right there...I don't want you to google fabfind...I don't want you to try and figure out how it works...I want you to sit back and use your critical thinking skills.

1) The ipad sells well (4.5 million so far)
2) The ipad is $500+

What else do you need to know?

Either:

a) There was going to be an infinitesimal quantity meaning you wouldn't get one
b) It was an out and out scam and you wouldn't get one
c) There was some catch and you wouldn't get one

Do you see what I mean? Even in the absolute super duper-est miracle situation you had a 1/10000 chance of getting a $10 ipad and a 9999/10000 chance of wasting hours of your day trying to get one.

So, please PLEASE the next time somebody tells you of a miracle promotion where a $500 item is being offered for $10, say "good luck with that" and IGNORE it.

Who broke the story

2010-10-06T00:04:00.000-04:00

The media is not the general public. It sounds like an obvious statement and, well, it is, but it's important to really understand that the media is not representative of the whole but rather a subset with very different ideas of what is important.

Now, I am not going to tackle a really deep existential issue here to demonstrate my point but to focus on a very minor one.

Credit for breaking a story.

Right now the New England Patriots are considered trading WR Randy Moss to Minnesota. The Twittersphere is full of "who broke the story" or is it? You see, it's very important to media types to identify who broke a story but utterly irrelevant to everybody else.

Jason Whitlock's tweet:

WhitlockJason Jason Whitlock

Simmons breaks Moss. I confirm Mariotti. Eff u, Bill. Eff u.

Is a perfect example.

Do I care who broke the story? No. Do you? No.

Why? Because everyone in the internet age can catch up within minutes, if not seconds. I can have an article up on this (or any subject) within ten minutes and suddenly being "first" doesn't matter anymore.

Breaking a story mattered in the 1950's when a daily paper might be a full-day ahead on an issue and you might buy one paper over another because of this. Today, who cares.

My larger point is that it shows how the media views itself differently than the general public does and writes about the things they feel are important. Which may not be a reflection of reality.

Just something to think about.

Eligible women

2010-10-05T00:37:00.002-04:00

According to a Vanity Fair poll, Jennifer Aniston is the most eligible woman in the world.

Did any guys vote in this poll?

Look, I don't want to be mean here...I don't know Jennifer Aniston...she might be a fabulous woman...what I do know is that men don't believe that a 41 year old woman is the most desirable...ever...

Take Jennifer Aniston and strip her of money and men would leap over her 41 year old body to the 20 year old hottie so fast it would make Aniston's head spin.

You can call me a chauvinist all you want but I guarantee you there is a significant reason why like eight men have dumped her...and odds are because she a) has a completely unrealistic idea of love b) wants a baby NOW or c) they can get a younger/prettier woman and don't need to date a 41 year old.

All things being equal men will choose youth over age every day of the week...

Oh and the fact that Elena Kagan got 4% just proves the poll is ridiculous (which I knew going in, but didn't have any other ideas to blog about)

Nuit Blanche

2010-10-04T10:49:00.002-04:00

Count me as disappointed with Nuit Blanche, the all-night arts festival held annually in Toronto.

My friends and I wander to see...

- Photos displayed on the wall of a Holt Renfrew store
- Blue LED lights and water mist to represent where the water line of the city used to be
- A guy playing a piano piece 840 times but really slow
and on and on.

What I find interesting about these types of events is how organizers fail to understand what works and what doesn't.

Here are my rules for a successful Nuit Blanche exhibit

1) It has to be a spectacle.

Playing a piano piece 840 times is an arbitrary bullshit idea that has no display value. Does it change if he plays it once? What is there to look at? Some guy playing a piano?

You need to have a big visual.

2) It has to be large or have quick flow through

While I think the official estimates of like a million people on the streets is absurd, there were far too many really small exhibits with long lines and/or big crowds that make enjoyment impossible.

You need to focus on things that cater to a lot of people.

3) There have to be a lot of them.

There were something like 130 installations...so why did two of them (i.e lower Bay station) have massive hours long lines?

Because they were amongst the very very few exhibits anyone cared enough to see.

You can't have 110 crappy exhibits, 10 decent ones and 10 good ones on a night where thousands of people were on the streets. I heard from friends that the lower Bay station (a subway station no longer in use) line was still hours long at 5am. That tells me there isn't nearly enough other things that people want to see.

4) Gimmicks are fine as long as they conform to rules 1-3

I have two non-science degrees. I can make any piece of art sound like it means something in two seconds flat.

Guy playing a piano piece 840 times? Symbolizes the redundancy of daily life. However, coming up with that doesn't make it mean anything. Hanging that same piano and player from a crane with the exact same premise, that would be fun to look at.

A night like Nuit Blanche is not for artwork that would otherwise be in a modern art museum...it's for artwork that appeals to the wow factor of wandering around on a cold night and seeing cool stuff. I think Nuit Blanche organizers have lost that (friends who have gone previous years say the first year was great and it's steadily gone downhill)

So there you go...I went...I was disappointed...everyone I know was disappointed...not a good sign.

Rant Guy Bits

2010-10-01T00:04:00.002-04:00

- Vince Young, QB for the Titans is a guy who says he doesn't pay attention to the media and doesn't "even read the stuff" is mad at how they cover him.

Anyone else see the logical flaw in that statement? Vince Young gets paid millions to be a horrible QB and is apparently as dumb as a post.

- Jose Contador, world cup cyclist, has been caught doping and blames "bad meat". The meat, which apparently everybody complained about was eaten on both July 20th and July 21st.

So many wonderful flaws:

1) Do you remember what you ate more than two months ago?
2) Nobody else, who ate the meat, has tested positive
3) How does he know it was the meat?
4) Why would he eat bad meat a 2nd time?

I realize that these people thing the public is stupid but could they not come up with a better lie than this?

- Suspended QB Ben Roethlisberger said he wished he could play this week against the Baltimore Ravens.

This is as opposed to all the other QB's who told their coaches "I want to sit on my ass eating cheetos so you can cut me and I can be an unemployed bum".

Are we this childish? You see, this statement is designed to set the stage for his return to the team, to let people know how competitive he is and that his heart is where it's "supposed" to be and to make fans forgive him for whatever it is he did that got him suspended.

And the media buys it, hook line and sinker.

Anytime you see a statement where somebody says something like "this is our funniest season yet" or "I've never felt healthier" you should immediately call bullshit. While it may be true, it's a statement that is meaningless. Nobody ever says the current season stinks and nobody ever "feels like they are an arthritic 87 year old".

FanExpo 2011

2010-09-30T00:04:00.000-04:00

If you had issues at FanExpo 2010 (odds are you did) and you emailed in to complain, you have or will hear back from the woman HobbyStar / FanExpo hired to listen to your complaints.

It's, obviously, very very early in the process (FanExpo 2011 being more than 11 months away) and Audra (hobbystarpr@gmail.com) is still calling people back but she agreed to answer my questions about her role and what changes she plans to propose to fix the many issues attendees encountered this year.

1) FanExpo has brought you on board to take a look at their operations and propose improvements. Where did you come from and what are your goals for the position?

I come from a Film Production and Event Management background – which are actually very similar…I started working with Fanexpo back in 2005 when I was coordinating Rue Morgue’s Festival of Fear portion of the show.

What I would like to bring to this show is a new approach to communication – more informed staff/volunteers leads to more informed attendees, which are happy attendees. More preparation and available information out there will simply make for a much more transparent show.

2) What are your plans in regards to improving communication with fans/attendees?

After talking to the attendees this year, the largest issue was getting mixed information from staff/security /volunteers. I want to make sure that next year every staff member has the same information and are thoroughly prepared for the show.

I would also like to propose more staff/volunteers available for information (ie. wait times, special ticketing, etc..) at each area of congestion.

3) What's in store for improving the volunteers?

Overhaul! I would like to implement a much more formal screening for the volunteers next year. We need to be sure that their skill set matches their position. Volunteers are such a huge part of the show and next year, I need them to be fully prepared and comfortable in their role. I also need them to know just how important their role is, and how relied on they really are.

4) What steps is FanExpo planning to win back the hearts of fans who may have had issues with this year's event?

Well, first and foremost – acknowledgment. They have hired me on to contact each individual who had difficulties
this year. I don’t think that has ever happened before. Each person now has a voice and is being heard through myself. FanExpo can now be aware of just how many people were affected by the show this year, as opposed to speculation. It’s been fantastic talking to people and I can really respect where they are coming from.

People want to be heard and they don’t want a generic email sent to them. Speaking to people individually has been great and most people feel a lot better about the future of the show. A lot of people are even sending ideas on things they would like to see and things that would have made the show more successful.

5) Is there any chance of a ticket cap such as the system used for San Diego Comic-Con?

I am not positive if that is an option for them, but I do have some great ideas to propose to them on maximizing ticket sales without overcrowding.

6) How confident should I be that FanExpo is going to be different in 2011?

Well, being in a much larger venue that can hold the capacity the show brings in is a good start. I think the show is in need of some fresh blood and I am very happy to be able to contribute for next year. I have seen this show grow from outside of their management so I can bring them a much different view of what I feel could make the show even better.

All in all, I don’t board sinking ships. I feel positive that there will be plenty of changes for the new year.

7) Any inside scoop on next year's headliners?

I wish! I’ve been too deep into phone calls to hear any of the gossip!

So, there you have it. I will follow up with Audra next year and see what the scoop is as it evolves. I am hoping that FanExpo understands the seriousness of the issues and resolves to actually listen to the people who look forward to and spend a lot of money at, their show.

If you had issues and have not contacted Hobbystar, feel free to email Audra (hobbystarpr@gmail.com) and she will ask for your phone number and call you back to discuss.

Nuit Blanche - Website Usability

2010-09-29T00:04:00.003-04:00

I will give you one simple reason that explain's Apple's success. They, one can only assume, hand their devices to people who, gasp, test them. I know, this radical thinking but I deal with so many people/companies/websites/tech a day that was clearly designed by a moron, I am not quite sure what else to surmise.

Nuit Blanche is a Toronto event where various art installations are put up on an all-night basis for one "morning" a year. It's a very popular event that offers unique art and a fun evening/morning.

The website blows.

- The ordering of installations is so stupid it's almost funny.

Yes that is installation 18 RIGHT NEXT to installation 30.

Let's say you want to see both. You browse the installations which, shockingly, are listed in order and so you add them to your planner (on the website) as you go through the list. You now end up with an event plan that lists them up to 12 spots apart.

Now, you can re-order the listing before printing, but wouldn't it have made far more sense to actually number the things in a manner that makes sense? Think about it. Installation 30 is closer to 18 than 19 is!

Do you think somebody who isn't tech savvy is going to see the little arrow that allows you to re-order things? Is it unreasonable to believe that people are more likely to see events that are grouped together than not? What is the downside to simply ordering things by proximity?

- Zones

The event is artificially segregated into three zones. Which would make sense only if the zones where 100 miles apart but whatever.

Does your planner aggregate events from multiple zones? Of course not! If you want to see one thing from each zone, you need to print off three maps/itineraries!

#17 and #39 are a couple blocks from each other...different zones...different maps! Think about it...#17 is closer to an event in another zone than most of the events in it's own zone!

- Resetting the map

Every single time you do anything on the website, everything resets itself. The map zooms out and unclicks all the options. I wish I was kidding.

- An event per page

The internet is not like a book. There are like 130 projects to see, do the organizers really think I want to click 130 times to load 130 pages? I can read the description and know if I am interested in five seconds, stick the damn info on one page! Or if you perfer one page per zone.

I am really tired of this kind of stuff. This is a website that undoubtedly cost thousands to make and it seems like nobody thought of simple things like "let's make this thing work". It's not hard, I found a half dozen major flaws inside five minutes.

Next time you think you've got something right, get ten people WHO DON'T WORK FOR YOU to test it.

Conflict of Interest

2010-09-28T00:04:00.000-04:00

A network invited me (I write for another website on comics/pop culture) to attend an advance screening of one of their fall shows. I attended and found a boardroom full of bloggers who were fed copious amounts of pizza/pop before watching two episodes and then getting a swag bag on the way out.

Now, I am sure that "journalists" would refuse a swag bag and I think a blogger should indicate that they received goods...but life ain't like that...and therein lies the rub.

You see, getting invited to this type of event is pretty much predicated on a positive review. If I bash the show, I get removed from the list, don't get an advance screening and don't get a swag bag and don't get to network with fellow bloggers.

Now, I gave away my swag bag and let another blogger from the site (who was also invited) do the piece...so I believe my ethical position is clear...but what if it was my website, what if I had to decide between the potential for a network maybe quoting me on their website or the value of networking with fellow bloggers that I would lose by not being invited to these events?

It's a very slippery slope...it's easy to give away a bag with a small amount of stuff...but would I have given away an ipod touch? a set of great headphones? a bunch of movie passes?...I'd like to think so, but the fact that I have to ask that question is why I want you to question everything (including me).

I write this blog because I enjoy it...I can't even imagine who would want to give me stuff to review...but if/when the network invites me again, I will go and eat their pizza and am not sure what I will do with the next swag bag they give me....

Jeff Pearlman - Right but so very wrong

2010-09-27T00:04:00.000-04:00

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/jeff_pearlman/09/24/edwards/index.html?eref=sihp

He argues that athletes are all over 18 and that they would benefit from not being coddled by their NFL teams so that they might be prepared for life after their careers. It's a logical argument that will undoubtedly make sense to everybody who reads it.

The problem is that he's 100% wrong.

The mistake he makes is believing that:

a) Athletes are functional adults
b) Are in any way shape or form capable of being functional adults
c) The NFL, or anyone else, cares what happens when they are done their careers

In other words, let's look at the average NFL draftee.

He is almost certainly:

a) Has played sports all his life and been cruised through every "class" through favoritism.
b) Has about as much raw intelligence/knowledge/life skills as the average rock.
c) Has their life filled with people whose only interest is to remain in good favor in case they make it in the NFL and they can mooch off him.
d) Is almost certainly the product of a broken home.
e) Is almost certainly utterly unprepared to deal with money (especially in amounts that they are paid)
f) Has few, if any, relationships in life where he is held accountable for his behavior.

Do you see what I mean?

It's like tossing a baby in to be raised by wolves and then the second they turn 18, say "Well, he's an adult, he can manage his affairs".

The reality is that the NFL is protecting an asset that is a ticking time bomb. The bomb will go off and the NFL just hopes it happens when their career is done.

By the time these kids enter the NFL, most are done as human beings. They are taught to be human battering rams who solve every problem with a bone crushing hit, to play no matter how much pain they are in, that they can skate through life because people adore them, that there will always be more money because people adore them, that they are super duper wonderful all the time because nobody dares offend them and be tossed out of the "entourage"...sound like how you grew up?

Exactly.

The answer is to raise human beings who are actual human beings. To make sure that these kids are held to the same academic standards as everyone else in class, that football practice isn't every waking minute, that they are not seen as a way out for every single mooch friend they grew up with, that coaches have an incentive to give a shit about them and on and on and on.

By the time they reach the NFL, the league has absolutely no choice but to protect their investment and coddle the crap out of them because at that point they simply don't and won't ever have the skills to manage as real human beings.

By the time they reach the NFL, it's too late. Most of these kids will spend all of their money on shit and be broke within 5 years of retiring.

The solution is not for the NFL to stop coddling them, the solution is for everybody to stop coddling them...from day 1.

More proof of the decline of civilization

2010-09-24T00:04:00.000-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZibAqWH4UIQ&feature=player_embedded#!

Katy Perry is in a minor flap because she, gasp, is wearing a dress that has cleavage in a clip that was supposed to air on Sesame st.

Wow....boobs...in a dress...I am sure that would warp the poor little minds of the those kids watching!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39328986/ns/travel-destination_travel/

A man at a Kansas museum put his head in a noose (that normally is hung higher up from the ceiling, out of reach from people) and passed out.

Cause for alarm until you realize that his fucking feet never left the ground! In other words, dude was standing there, put his head in a noose and passed out.

Best part of the article:

The noose had been hanging where it was since the museum opened 63 years ago without incident, Brehm said. It has been taken down, and officials had not decided another would be put back up.

Am I the only one sick of overreactions? The damn thing has hung up in the ceiling without incident for 23,000 consecutive days and one day it drops down and some idiot puts his head into it and passes out even though he never leaves the ground (i.e. he didn't hang himself) and suddenly they are re-thinking the idea of having the noose up?

There is a huge difference between avoidable hazards and shit happening. I have no doubt that kids or people can be injured doing pretty much everything. Fuck, I've seen professional athletes destroy their knee jumping and celebrating a good play! UNTOUCHED by anyone else! (i.e. a kicker). I pulled a groin muscle walking once. I have a big ass scar on my right thumb because I broke a dish while washing it and gashed the crap out of myself.

Shit happens.

Hawaii Five-O A review

2010-09-23T00:04:00.001-04:00

I feel like I am 80 some days. I watched the new Hawaii Five-O and wonder if the generations that watch this dreck understand what's wrong with it. Hell, I hope they do.

Things I saw in 42 minutes

- Grace Park's character, a police academy cadet with one week to go, assault another surfer for stealing her wave (while surfing).

Seriously, she comes on to the beach and hits him in the face without warning or provocation because he stole her wave.

Is there any consequence to an act that would land you or I in jail? No, two current cops and one former cop basically cheer her on.

- O'loughlin and Caan arrest a woman whose only crime seems to have been that they (with guns drawn and with no identification that they are the police) grab her as she's leaving a house and she escapes and warns her boyfriend.

What, exactly, is the crime? Last time I checked the police can't just abduct random people because it suits their needs, not identify themselves and then charge them with a crime!

- O'loughlin or Caan (I don't care enough to figure out which is which) assault a prisoner and demand information. They pretty much tell him that they can get away with assault because there isn't a 2nd witness to the act.

And cops wonder why people hate them? Maybe, just maybe, it's the continual Hollywood portrayal that they will do anything they want and never face any consequences.

- O'loughlin or Caan drive at high speed (visibly without seatbelts on) towards a ship that they board in violation of direct orders from the fucking governor and without anything resembling a warrant and, of course, shoot a bunch of people.

- There are the usual million shots of people firing a zillion rounds from rifles that are not capable of firing a zillion rounds. Do you know how long a full burst of automatic fire is for an AK-47? 4 seconds. That's right, 4 seconds and you're clip is empty.

and on and on.

Look, I am sure real police work is boring but these two "cops" committed so many crimes in the first episode alone that the absurd scale went to 11 out of 10.

Foursquare

2010-09-22T09:12:00.003-04:00

For anyone that doesn't know, Foursquare is an application that allows you to broadcast your current location via Twitter or Facebook to your friends/social contacts...the idea being that other people might be in the area and wish to pop in and see you...I guess.

I don't want to talk about the potential for robbery...given that you are telling people where you are it stands to reason that a crook might find that information valuable.

I don't want to talk about the potential for stalking...same deal.

I want to talk about life and meaning...you see...Foursquare allows you be declared "super mayor" of a location if you visit often enough...

I swear that's not a joke.

Here's the thing...are people's lives so bereft of meaning that they actually care about the "achievement" of having been to the same place more often than anybody else? Are people so without the ability to actually accomplish anything of substance that this is some sort of personal ego boost to say "I go to X bar more often than anyone else!"?

I'd suggest that anyone who is excited about being the prospect of a "mayor" or "super mayor" look in the mirror and decide to make something out of your life before it's too late.

Best/Worst Signatures in Comics

2010-09-21T00:04:00.000-04:00

Thought it might be different to put up a post rating the best/worst signatures in comics.

- I should add that this is, of course, not a reflection on the artist or their work, just on how I think they sign their name and all totally in good fun with no offense meant.
- This is based on my personal collection of signed stuff.
- Ning wouldn't let me post more than 3 pics so I went with the collages you see below.

What makes a great signature?

1) Identifiable

I really believe that the great ones have a signature that can be identified by somebody not already familiar with the signature.

2) Unique

While we all sign our names differently, the best ones do something that nobody else does.

3) Pretty

Quite simply, does it enhance the artwork or comic cover? Is it cool/pretty etc...

The WORST!

Dis-Honorable mention: J Bone, Joe St Pierre, Tim Bradstreet

8. Bruce Timm (Batman TAS, Justice League)

Now, don't me wrong. Bruce is in my personal pantheon (along with Jhonen Vasquez, Stan Sakai, Sergio Aragones) but that is almost the problem here, he's way too important to comics (albeit more on the animated side) to have such a boring signature.

3-7. Alex Maleev (Daredevil), Robert Kirkman (Walking Dead), Doug Mahke (Green Lantern), Sal Abbinanti (Atomika), and Cameron Stewart (Seaguy, Batman and Robin)

Also known as the squigglers.

Go ahead, tell me which is which. If you didn't know what their signatures looked like, there is no way you'd ever correctly guess that the top row was Cameron Stewart, Alex Maleev and Doug Mahke and the bottom was Kirkman and Abbinanti.

2. Ty Templeton (Writer - Numerous)

My biggest issue with his signature is that it's tiny. It really isn't much bigger than 14 pt...and it's boring.

1. Brian Azzarello (Writer - 100 bullets/Joker)

Brian's siggy could easily fall under the squiggler category but it's such a lazy squiggle that I think it wins the award here. I am guessing it's supposed to be AZ but who knows, maybe he just doesn't like signing his name and came up with this.

The BEST!

Honorable Mention: Paolo Rivera, Darwyn Cooke, Marcus To, Joe Sinnott, Stan Lee, Ron Frenz

7. Barry Kitson (Spider-Man)

The big "B" makes the signature.

6. George Perez (Wonder Woman)

Although George signs comics differently (this is his sketch/published work signature) this is the one that is more famous (obviously as more people see it). It's simple and classic.

5. Gary Frank (Superman)

It's just a cool "G" woven with the "F".

4. Herb Trimpe (Hulk, 1st Wolverine appearance)

Simple yet distinctive.

3. Ernie Chan (Batman, Conan)

I just like that he chose to make the 2nd "E" in Ernie the big one. If he reversed it, it wouldn't look nearly as cool.

2. Walter Simonson (Thor)

I wish I had a better example (i.e. signed on a white background) but both comics he signed for me have busy covers. Anyway, this is as distinctive as it gets.

1. Dale Keown (Hulk, Pitt, Darkness)

My #1 slot goes to Dale. I think this is just perfect. It's unique, relatively easy to figure out that it's DKeown (i.e unlike Walter Simonson, it's likely anybody could figure out who signed it) and it's just cool.

Casey Affleck admits hoax is, in fact, hoax

2010-09-20T00:04:00.002-04:00

Casey Affleck and Joaquin Phoenix hatched a plan. It was pure genius. Spend two years convincing people that Joaquin Phoenix was giving up acting in order to pursue a rap career so they could film it and present it as a documentary.

Did I say genius? I'm sorry, I meant retarded.

You see, people knew it was a hoax from the first second Joaquin appeared in full beard and mumbling nonsense. At no point, ever, did anyone believe this wasn't an act.

So what was the point?

Well, Joaquin Phoenix lost two years of his prime to a film that has made a whopping $100,000 in limited release and, it seems to me, has very little big earning potential in wide release.

Remember, while not a massively huge actor, Phoenix does have four $100 million+ films to his name, he's been nominated for "best actor" at the academy awards and could have made far more money by picking one or two good roles to do over that time.

He's also damaged his reputation and looks like an idiot.

Casey Affleck, the director, hasn't exactly made positive headlines with this film and it seems clear he took two years out of his friend's career for a project that never had much upside to begin with.

That's the thing that baffles me the most, where was the upside? If everything went as well as it could possibly go, what would be the result?

According to Box Office Mojo there are exactly two documentary films made in the last 28 years who earned more than 33 million at the box office (Fahrenheit 9/11 and March of the Penguins).

So, being reasonable the absolute best they could hope for was a 50-60 million dollar gross...now that wouldn't be bad given what this piece of crap cost to make but certainly not worth the 1 or 2 pictures Phoenix could have made instead.

You don't shoot for the stars in a cardboard box when NASA has a shuttle standing by.

Inez Sainz

2010-09-17T00:04:00.004-04:00

Inez Sainz a "journalist" for TV Azteca is in the news because a number of NY Jets players allegedly made inappropriate comments to her while she was on the sidelines of one of the practices.

As per usual, there is lots of coverage mainly centered around one of two ideas:

1) She's a journalist on the job and should be able to do that job without being sexually harassed
2) She's a sexpot who is on tv because of a great ass/rack and has about as much journalistic credibility as Glenn Beck + Behavior is expected with 53 horny professional athletes.

Here's the thing.

Inez has a job because men want to have sex with her. Period. There is absolutely no debate on this. She doesn't have a journalism degree, she has no history of insight or investigative reports. She is smoking hot and works in a visual medium. It's not complicated.

So the idea is that the audience watches her because they want to have sex with her, she dresses like a skank and has multiple magazine shoots (in bikini) and that's all totally fine but somehow people are supposed to respect her while she's working?

Does a woman deserve to be treated like a piece of meat? No. Did the Jets act like morons? Absolutely.

Do I understand that a bunch of men would have the hots for a woman who is pretty much defined online by what a great ass she has? (Google her and see what comes up) Yes I do. Do I feel any sympathy for a woman who sells her looks and then wonders why she's defined by them? No way.

Women need to understand that you cannot have everything. You cannot expect to be treated as a respectable journalist if you were on the cover of FHM last week in a small bikini. It's one or the other and it's very clear that Inez chose "other".

Should be be harassed? No.

Does it amaze me that the harassment always seems to happen to the ones Jason Whitlock calls "sideline barbie". Not a bit.

Japanese men take virtual girlfriends on vacation

2010-09-16T00:04:00.003-04:00

http://www.thesmokingjacket.com/getting-some/japanese-dudes-take-their-virtual-girlfriends-on-non-virtual-getaways

Wow.

Just Wow.

I am almost speechless.

Is Japan really that fucking crazy? Do they not have anybody who stands up and say "Umm, hey, I am the mental heath guy...you know the doctor...and I think that men who take computer games on vacation with them and pretend they are human beings...are...you know...in need of serious help...and...ummm...rather than cater to their delusions...maybe...just maybe...we should get them some serious meds and figure out why, as a society, we have men taking...you know...games on vacation as their PARTNER...just a thought."

I mean, come on! Really???

I am all for alternative lifestyles...but, at a certain point, you just have to say "wait a minute" and get these people some psychiatric care...

Most dominant athlete in the world is...

2010-09-15T00:04:00.002-04:00

...Esther Vergeer according to Fanhouse

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2010/09/12/esther-vergeers-dominance-transcends-her-wheelchair/?ncid=txtlnkusspor00000002

Now, it should be understood that I have total respect for Esther and her ability to play tennis in a wheelchair. I think she could undoubtedly crush me on a tennis court and should be lauded for what she does.

I also think calling her the most "dominant athlete in the world" is so beyond fucking stupid that it's almost not worth a blog post.

You see, Esther plays in a niche sport with very few competitors. There are all of 185 ranked women's tennis players who are wheelchair bound (compared to 1100 abled women on the WTA tour) making her crushing a small pool of competitors utterly worthless in terms of comparing her to dominant athletes of popular sports.

I could easily say that I am the most dominant athlete because I have never lost a game of Rant Guy Ball. Sounds ridiculous but there are only 184 more ranked women's tennis players in the entire world than there are Rant Guy Ball players.

Do you see what I mean? Anytime you have a small pool of competitors it is likely that anyone who is dominant is going to be REALLY dominant.

That's why major sports have incremental record breaking. Nobody is running a 9 second 100 meter dash but rather 9.79 (or whatever) that might be a few tenths of a second faster than the previous record holder. I.e lots of competitors having lots of competitions means that it's vastly unlikely that anybody is going to come along and crush the competition for an extended period of time.

Do you see? It's far more impressive for Roger Federer to win 16 majors in ten years (or whatever) against world class competition than for me to kick my cat's ass in Rant Guy Ball.

I congratulate Esther on her wins but she is, in no way, the most dominant athlete in anything other than women's wheelchair tennis.

Sometimes being right is the wrong way to go

2010-09-14T00:04:00.000-04:00

One of the many life lessons I have learned is that being right (and saying so) is often the wrong way to go.

I read this article about a fellow who comes back to the U.S. and presents his I.D as required and then makes a point about not answering the customs official's questions, as is his right. This, of course, pisses them off and inevitably ends with his being delayed before somebody decides to release him.

http://knifetricks.blogspot.com/2010/04/i-am-detained-by-feds-for-not-answering.html

Now, I think customs is pretty much a waste of time and effort. I don't believe they do much good in catching real criminals, I don't believe the state has any right to tax me on goods I purchased abroad and I think customs is mostly filled with power hungry pieces of shit who couldn't get a real job if their life depended on it.

I also answer their questions in a respectful manner and try to get out of there as quickly as possible with a minimum of fuss.

Most of life should be looked at in terms of gain/loss. What do you gain or lose out of following a given course of action.

This guy wastes his time and risk further searches (which aren't technically legal based on his refusal to answer questions, which remember is his right, but with both know that customs will say he looked dodgy or come up with an excuse to justify searching him or detaining him further) through a course of action that gets him nothing but the satisfaction of having stood up for his rights to a bunch of rent-a-cop morons with no ability to change policy or understand the point he's making.

In other words, it's like screaming at a bunch of monkeys. All you are doing is making your throat sore and wasting your time 'cause the monkeys don't understand what you are saying and even if they did, they wouldn't care.

Now, I am in no way suggesting that one should simply ignore one's rights simply because it's easier to bow to authority. I am saying that one has to choose battles that are worth fighting.

Refusing to say "I was on vacation" just isn't one of those battles.

Ticketmaster

2010-09-13T09:53:00.002-04:00

Ticketmaster has to be about the most absurd organization in the history of the world. They have to be stopped. What they do to consumers on a daily basis simply can't be legal.

I was looking into an event that has $20 tickets.

Guess what the final charge would be for my $20 ticket.

That's right!

$38.50!

There is:

A facility fee
A convenience fee
An order processing fee
A ticket delivery fee

Totaling $18.50 on a $20 ticket.

I don't even want to go into the logic of how it's impossible to escape the convenience fee (i.e no matter where I buy the ticket, I pay the fee, so where is the convenience) or how you can then charge me an order processing fee when you've already charged me for convenience or the ludicrous nature of charging me to print off my own fucking ticket.

I will just say this. I hope you join me and refuse to buy a ticketmaster ticket ever again.

What Bay Bloor Radio did wrong - a customer's story

2010-09-10T00:04:00.000-04:00

I am a perfectionist. I take pride in the fact that I spent four and a half years at a firm with huge banks as clients and managed the relationships so well as to see annual increases in client satisfaction each and every year. This included the bank who is so noxious that a director had to be present at weekly meetings to make sure the account manager and I were not, literally, abused too badly.

So, when I deal with a company, I expect a similar level of care and attention.

Bay Bloor Radio failed miserably.

- On August 9th I emailed their sales staff about a tv stand
- I was told it wasn't in stock.

Problem #1

An email back to a customer should have this progression:

1) Is the item in stock? Yes/no
2) If no, can you get it? Yes/no
3) If no, is there a similar item in stock? Yes/no
4) If no, can you get a similar item? Yes/no
5) If no, is there somebody I can recommend to client who may have it? Yes/no
6) If no, apoligize

So when the answer from "Dave" comes back "I'm sorry but we don't have any of those new in a box." they are basically saying "I don't want your business and will make zero effort to earn it"

I responded with the quite logical (see #2 above) question "Can you order one?" and was told that "I can check it out,when my buyer returns from vacation."

Problem #2

Never ever ever ever tell a client you are going to do something and then not do it. This is a very simple precept in the customer retention game. You email the buyer and then stick a little 1 minute appointment in outlook (or whatever) to remind yourself to ask the buyer when he/she gets back from vacation.

AND you tell the customer when the person is coming back and when to expect an answer.

None of this happened with Bay Bloor Radio and I followed up a month later.

Problem #3

When a customer follows up a month later you APOLOGIZE for not getting back to him.

I was then told the item would cost $100 to ship (Bay Bloor Radio being all of ten seconds from where I live and the item could be sent by cab for $20).

So I bought it somewhere else for $0.00 in shipping.

Problem #4

You never ever ever assume you are the only game in town. When I commented that $100 in shipping was crazy, the response should have been to see what they could do. When I worked retail we had staff deliver stuff on occasion (nobody at Bay Bloor passes by my place on the way home?) I ever drove to Milton once for a customer!

The reality is that Bay Bloor Radio lost a sale because Dave is lazy and is either a poor hire or doesn't have any incentive to be a good employee (i.e. he is paid to answer emails and there is no tracking or commission to determine if he adds any value by doing his job properly).

We are not in the middle of a boom period and you simply cannot turn away customers.

Your relationship with company X

2010-09-09T00:04:00.000-04:00

Facebook is/has come out with another feature called "likes in common"...I don't know much about it but that isn't actually germane to the point I am going to make...the reaction to it will be so predictable that I don't want to waste time even writing about it (think every other change Facebook has ever made)

I want this post to be about a singular thought:

Every company exists for the sole purpose of selling you things.

I want you to stop thinking about things like Facebook or Google as social goods and start thinking about them as entities whose entire existence is predicated on their ability to sell you things.

Period.

I am weary of people telling me how pissed off they are at Facebook for doing such and such or how Googles "Don't be evil" mission statement/company motto isn't true anymore (hint: it was never true).

Given the choice between selling you stuff and being "good" , what do you think Google execs would choose 100% of the time?

Given the choice between selling you stuff and keeping your privacy, what do you think Facebook execs would choose 100$ of the time?

Do you see my point?

I don't want you to give information to Facebook and then complain when they use it in a manner you don't like. I don't want you to use Google for everything and then wonder how or why they know you like skiing or tennis.

I want you to understand that every single thing any company does is entirely designed around wringing the absolute most amount of money out of you.

So stop complaining about private companies doing private stuff with the information you gave them. They are not interested in what you think just how much money they can make out of you.

That isn't cynical it's the entire basis of our culture/economy.

Tiger Woods didn't really drive a Buick he just wanted to sell you one.

Tom Verducci

2010-09-08T00:04:00.003-04:00

Tom Verducci is the kind of writer I despise. I rarely find his work interesting and more often than not he adds absolutely nothing to the equation.

His latest piece suggests that MLB go the following route.

- Add a 2nd wild-card team
- Have 2nd wild-card team play 1st wild card team in one game playoff
- playoffs resume as normal.

This is supposed to be a great benefit because:

- More teams in the race!

In the American league this pits the injury riddled Red Sox against the slightly better than mediocre White Sox

- Yankees and Rays have a real race!

Because right now neither cares, apparently, are are just playing out the string. The Yankees are 8-2 in their last 10 games.

- Elminination games!

Apparently it's bad that only 20% of playoff matches go to a decisive game! (too much of a good thing?)

Ok here's the deal and it's called the "law of unintended consequences" and it basically says that changing something might well lead to things you didn't intend to happen and likely don't want.

1) The Tampa Bay Rays with the 2nd best record in all of baseball could conceivably be eliminated in a one game playoff.

Yhe Rays are 2nd to the Yankees in the AL East and are the wild-card. Under Verducci's system they would play a home game against the White Sox (if the season ended today) and if they lose they are done.

2) It fucks with post-season rotations. Wanna see the best against the best? Well, not when the Rays have to use their best pitcher in a one game playoff and then have to go with an improvised rotation for their 1st round series (if they win)

3) Who says the races would be any better? The Rays might well decide they can't take the Yankees and instead really just play out the string trying to line everything up for the elimination game.

4) Who says there are more teams in the race? In the NL there are five decent teams and then a drop-off. The Giants would pretty much be the lock for this play-in game (against either Philly or Atlanta), so there is no extra drama.

5) Who wants to see the White Sox play against the San Francisco Giants play for the World Series? (Other than White Sox or Giants fans).

The more mediocre teams you send to the playoffs the higher the likelihood that two mediocre teams go on a good run and make the world series.

7) Who enjoys the NBA playoffs? Nobody!

Every year I hear the same complaints about the NBA. The playoffs drag forever, nobody knows when the games are on etc...etc... and this is what Verducci wants to emulate? An even longer post-season?

So there you have it, another dumb idea that makes little sense.

Are we really this PC?

2010-09-07T00:04:00.000-04:00

I'd last about ten minutes as a politician or public persona. Maybe.

Fanhouse, employer of gibbering idiots like Jay Mariotti, has announced that hurricane Katrina is off limits for any and all references that aren't solemn and respectful, according to them.

Who made Fanhouse the arbiter of anything? Fanhouse did! Gee, what a shock.

A talking head said "The Vikings need to go down there and hit that town like Katrina." in reference to the Vikings game against the Saints.

Why are we even talking about this? Who fucking cares?

Is it a comment I would have made? No. Is it deserving of a national rebuke followed by the inevitable meaningless apology and possible suspension (or firing) of course not. Except that the dumb comment/fake apology is now pretty much a national sport. Anything even vaguely controversial is attacked with venom and fury as if the guy (or gal) who said it ate babies on live tv.

Guess what, New Orleans was doomed. It's built on a fucking flood plain! You know what that means? It means it's gonna flood! Shocking stuff.

Yes 2000 people died and yes that's sad and yes, making fun of it is neither smart nor sensitive. However, last time I checked I didn't want to live in a fucking police state where assholes like the people at Fanhouse were the arbiters of what speech is ok and what isn't.

Ralph Lauren

2010-09-03T09:52:00.002-04:00

http://boingboing.net/2009/10/06/the-criticism-that-r.html#previouspost

I love big companies. I sit here from my blogging chair and admire as they continually shoot themselves in the foot and then hobble around yelling at everyone but themselves.

I love how MLB and tennis issue takedown notices of their clips on youtube (because people actually interested in their sports are a bad thing) and I love how every single company reacts to scandal in the same idiotic way.

1. Somebody points out scandal
2. Company tries to bully pointer-outer with lawyers
3. Bad press and or pointer-outer knowing their rights makes scandal far more well known than would every otherwise happen
4. Company retracts lawyer attack and cops to scandal

I wish, just once, a company would start with "you're right, we screwed up, generic apology" and bam, problem goes away.

So bring on Ralph Lauren which produced an ad with absurd photoshopping (check link) to create a model of hideous proportions and then tried to force anyone who said "wow, that's bad photoshopping" to take down the image (contrary to "fair use" which is totally allowed) and then, gasp, copped to bad photoshopping and made itself look royally stupid, created ill will with bloggers and customers and all in a very unnecessary way.

Click on the link, look at the horrible ad and be amazed that yet another company responded to an issue in the worst way possible.

Lessons from my first season of conventions

2010-09-02T00:04:00.000-04:00

As you know, this is the first year of convention attending for me. I went to (all in Toronto) Wizard, TCAF, Fan Appreciation and Fan Expo.

Here is what I learned over the course Spring/Summer.

1) Sketches are way harder than I thought

As a rational person, I find the artists who take a list to be the best of the bunch. Sadly, most of them want you to line up which is an inefficient use of your time and turns conventions into a slog.

As in my previous posts, getting a Barry Kitson sketch could easily have been an entire day affair at Fan Appreciaton...of standing in line...which is about as much fun as a root canal.

So, you probably need to choose between a top guy or a bunch of the smaller guys.

1b) Be prepared to be disappointed with a sketch

At some point, probably soon, you will pay for a sketch in advance and end up with a piece of...well...garbage.

2) Autographs are way easier that I thought

If the person attended the show and I wanted them to sign a comic, I went something like 47/50 on the year with only a couple people I either never found at their desk or decided it wasn't worth sticking around for (like anything, sometimes at the end of the day I am so sick of being at a convention I just want to go home and rest my feet)

Had I REALLY cared, I could have gone 50/50.

Same with celebs, I remember sprinting to hit an ATM to get cash for Gil Gerrard the first day of Wizard. I was convinced he would be impossible to get. How absolutely silly that looks now. Only "A" listers will have a big line.

3) Somebody won't show up and the convention will (on purpose) do a shitty job telling you.

Eliza Dushku was in all the ads for Wizard...poof she disappeared from the website...her absence was marked in a little bitty corner of the website.

Tim Bradstreet was one of the headliners of Fan Appreciation...poof not there...got an email the night before only because I was on the Facebook fan page...ZERO mention of it at the show.

Now...whether it's the artist (who can be flaky) or the promoter (who is banking on the name to get you in the door) nobody has any real interest in telling you that the lineup has changed because it can only lessen your interest in attending.

3b) Don't bank on any specific person attending

Let's say you are heading to a convention and Harrison Ford is supposed to be there. You go out and buy an original Star Wars Poster ($400) for him to sign. He cancels last minute. You only wanted the poster if you could have it signed.

Margot Kidder was supposed to be at Wizard, I bought a replica Superman poster, she didn't show. The poster is worthless to me if it's not signed (A replica poster is about 412th on the list of things I have that I'd frame).

If you don't want the item if you can't get it signed, you have to decide whether or not to risk it. Just understand that you have zero recourse if a celebrity cancels and you're left holding a $400 poster you don't want.

4) Headliners first, everything else second

It's not without a little bit of pride that I got the headliner at Wizard (Jewel Staite), TCAF (Paul Pope, Charles Vess), Fan Appreciation (Barry Kitson, Philip Tan) and FanExpo (Stan Lee, Summer Glau) to either sketch or sign for me.

The only headliner I missed was William Shatner and I just decided to help a friend meet Stan Lee instead.

Head there first and get them done before even thinking about worrying about anything else.

5) Don't expect "personal"

This isn't meant to be cynical but more a reflection on reality. You aren't going to have a ten minute chat with an "A" lister, it just isn't going to happen. Ask them a quick question, hand them something to sign, pay for it and be on your way.

6) Don't expect the tv persona

Erin Gray was super mean to me. I have a friend who is 19 and was hit on mercilessly by one of the, MUCH, older stars at Wizard. Don't let a bad experience ruin the enjoyment of whatever it is that you enjoyed them in.

7) Be prepared

Don't bank on there being maps available or volunteers having schedules on them. Hit the website and print them off yourself.

Also, bring a bottle of water and some power-bars.

8) Bring patience

Always good advice but cons are full of people and popular stuff (celebs/panels) have lines. It's either accept that or don't go.

9) Accept you aren't going to do everything you want

My three day FanExpo was getting 25 comic artists to sign comics, picking up sketches and Summer Glau. That took 75% of the time at the con. The other 25% was helping a friend do interviews.

I simply didn't have time to get that many comics signed by that many different artists and attend all the panels I wanted to see. You have to make a choice.

10) Remember, it's not a job

It's supposed to be fun. If you have a list of stuff so long that it's like a military operation, scale it down and build in some time to just wander and enjoy.

Nationalism

2010-09-01T11:00:00.002-04:00

I just read an article on MSNBC that askes the question "Will Fish let us down at the U.S. Open?"

You see, Mardy Fish is an American tennis player whose highest ranking, 17 in the world, is certainly solid but unspectacular but represents about as good as it gets for US tennis players at the moment.

My questions are this:

1) What does Mardy Fish owe the American public that his performance (or lack therof) could potentially be some sort of slight against people whose only commonality is they live in the same area of the world?

2) Does nationalism really matter in an individual sport? It's one thing to root for the US in a national based competition like the Olympics (with country flags, national anthems etc..) but Mardy Fish is one guy who just happens to be an American.

3) Do people actually decide they like a player simply because of where he/she was born? My favorite all-time men's player is Thomas Muster...and I have nothing personally relating to Austria...I just liked that a guy with bad knees played a style completely unsuited to a guy with bad knees (grind it out matches)

Anyway, I just find it really weird that anyone would even ask a question about whether or not Mardy Fish's performance in an individual event could possibly let down people he doesn't know who just happen to have the same passport.

J.K Rowlings gives piddling donation, lauded

2010-08-31T11:08:00.002-04:00

I am tired of absolute numbers.

J.K. Rowling gave 15.4 million dollars to set-up a new clinic for MS research. Wonderful. JK is a 45 year old worth 800 million dollars and who will almost certainly continue to earn millions annually due to royalties and (possibly) revenue based on the final two movies (I am not sure if she has that as part of the movie rights she sold).

In other words, she cared so much for her mother (who had MS) that she decided to give all of 1.9% of her current fortune for the research on the disease that killed her.

Big fucking deal.

Her massive donation is the same as a person with a million dollars donating $19,000 to charity or to a person worth $250,000 giving less than $5,000.

AND the best part is that she is setting up a new clinic! Awesome. You know what new clinic's need? Managers, staff, rent and a million other expenses that will eat up most of that cash.

If she really gave a shit she'd have donated that money to a research clinic that was already in existence and already paying the capital costs associated with running any enterprise.

Just because 15.4 million is a lot to you or I, don't be fooled. This is a token amount and will prove utterly meaningless for MS research.