I'll take real life for $2000 Alex

Chase Credit Card Fraud Department may also be a Fraud

2012-01-23T19:33:00.000-08:00

When I get back from the client site on Thursday, after I've flown back into O'Hare and after I've briskly walked through the terminal, and after I've weighed the merits of the cab line vs. the CTA blue line, and after I've decided that the cab line is the better option because I saw that girl get robbed that one time, and after I've gotten into a cab which I always hope is one of the new clean hybrids but usually ends up a crappy Crown Victoria with a broken seat belt, the LAST thing I want is to find out I've been the target of identity theft.

But that's what happened not too long ago.

As the cab pulled out of the termimal, a voice mail notification popped up. It was a message from Chase, my credit card company, telling me they thought I may have had my card stolen. They instructed me to listen to a number of recent charges and call their number if any of them were not made by me.

$10 at a parking garage in Philadelphia...makes sense

$20 at our most frequent Thai takeout place...probably legit

$800 at a Toys R Us in Colorado...hmmm, might want to look into that one

With that, I called the 800 number Chase gave me to their Fraud department.

After a lengthy series of automated prompts, I got through to a nice representative with an unusual accent. Definitely not American, not even fake American. It also wasn't from Bangalore. Sounded like Central or Eastern European. A little like this guy actually...

So let's call her Peggy.

Peggy explained that Chase detecting some unusual charges on my card and wanted to make sure it hadn't been stolen.

Fortunately, I still had the card in my pocket. It was also fortunate that it was my Chase British Airways Visa, which I use for absolutely nothing other than places that won't accept my SPG American Express. So even if the card was stolen, it wouldn't impact any auto-pay setups like the last time I had a card number change, when taking a drive to Atlantic City nailed me for at least 5 toll violations when it couldn't replenish my account.

So, seriously, this Visa card essentially is only used at that Thai place. Just about nowhere else.

So it was surprising when Peggy told me my card had been charged for $800 at a Toys R Us in Colorado, and $400 at a Red Lobster in California. (Note, I may have transposed the dollar values. It could have been $400 at Toys R Us and $800 at Red Lobster, I honestly can't tell which seems less plausible)

I told her those charges were definitely not mine. I couldn't even envision spending $100 at a Red Lobster! I'm pretty sure it's unlimited shrimp for like $12.99! What the hell would 400 get you? Sex with a lobster? Would people pay for that?

Anyway, the point is the charges were NOT legitimate, and Chase was right to flag it.

Peggy explained how the charges would be cancelled and they'd express ship out a brand new card with a new number.

OK, I said, but will you be able to tell me anything about how my card information was stolen? When you guys follow up on it, can you let me know what you find?

The response from Peggy?

"Well, we typically don't investigate these types of incidents. We just replace the card with a new number and issue a new card. Although if you would like to involve the authorities you can certainly direct them to us and we can provide them any details"

So this was the response? Basically a, "Hopefully it doesn't happen again!" type of thing?

I assumed they had dozens of professional credit card theft police! Some kind of advanced fraud detection unit! A SWAT team of hard-bitten veterans itching to take down those thieving Lobster-screwers!

At least, I had assumed, they could've told me what business was the source of the theft (hint: maybe I should stop eating Pad Thai)

Not exactly.

Instead, they didn't seem to give it a second thought. Someone got my information, so they just changed it, case closed.

Frankly, I'm a little underwhelmed. But again, it's a card I barely use, so even if it happens again, the damage would be limited.

Still...odd that Chase didn't seem to care.

Theory on Hollywood Sequels

2012-01-17T19:45:00.000-08:00

This past New Years Eve, my wife and I had some friends over for a small celebration. There was a good amount of food, alcohol, and of course, trivia.

Now, if I told you that my wife and I gave a Year In Review style quiz with multiple question types, genres, and answer sheets to our friends, how much would you bet that it was my idea? (Remember, this is the same guy who re-took the SATs for fun)

Like a million dollars right? Well you'd be wrong.

Turns out my wife was really into putting everyone to the test to see which major events they could remember (and by major events, I mean really major. I think we had one question on Osama Bin Laden but four on the various Kardashians)

Anyway, one of the questions was on the Top Box Office Hits of 2011. I got to be a guinea pig for the test beforehand, and I did a terrible job on this question. For whatever reason, I missed a bunch, even though I'm a huge movie fan.

So, when it came time for the answers, I quickly went for the movies I missed, which appear below in rank order.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1
The Hangover Part II
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
Fast Five
Cars 2
Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol
Thor
Rise of the Planet of the Apes

When I looked at the list, I was pretty shocked that they were almost all sequels. Everything was the second or third or fourth incarnation of various franchises, with various combinations of pirates, robots, vampires, and apes.

The one exception, Thor, you could argue is also a sequel as it's really just the next in the sequence of Marvel Comics-based releases leading up to the super-huge Avengers film coming up.

That got me wondering, sure we like to accuse Hollywood of a complete lack of creativity (outside figuring out new ways to blow something up or cause a gruesome death), but is that really the case?

One could certainly argue that sequels in and of themselves aren't 'uncreative,' which I would largely agree with. There are tons of sequels which are pretty darn good in their own right (Bill Simmons, for example, argues Beverly Hills Cop II is a better film than the original. Now, that's completely insane, but there are dozens of actual examples)

However, while we can't definitively state that sequels aren't creative, we can use their presence as shorthand. The more Hollywood derives its success from its own established cultural capital, it should at least be a sign that not all their juices are flowing.

So, my question then became, have sequels increased?

Well, take a look at the chart below and you tell me:

Now, this chart illustrates the raw number of sequels that were in the top 10 Box Office Hits for each of the past 31 years. Starting with 1980 (thanks to BoxOfficeMojo.com for the data!), I looked at each year and quickly determined whether they were sequels or not (The presence of the number 2 or 3, or generally anything with Roman numerals helped out quite a bit)

But at first glance, that seems to be a heck of a trend over the last three decades.

The average year in the 80's had ~2 sequels (think Smokey and the Bandit II, or Crocodile Dundee II {Side note: By the way! Did you know that in 1988, Crocodile Dundee II actually grossed more money than the original Die Hard?!? And it wasn't even close, Paul Hogan brought in $109M to Bruce Willis' $83M! What the hell was everyone's problem back then???)

By the time we get to the aughts (00's, still trying to get aughts to catch on but I think it's a losing battle at this point), ~4 movies out of the top 10 were sequels. And if 2011 is any indication, it shows no signs of slowing down.

Now some people might argue that these last few years have been skewed by the popularity of a few mega-series based on recent books (Harry Potter, Twilight) and those gigantic franchises are atypical. However, if we look back at the 80's, there were also a bunch of huge mega-franchises, and while they weren't based on books, I'm not sure we can discount Rocky, Star Trek, and the early chronicles of one Indiana Jones (who's a University of Chicago alumnus btw).

So I don't know that I buy that argument, even if these new films skew more towards children/teens/tweens.

Another idea is that there were just as many sequels then as there are now, it's just they didn't do as well and fell outside my arbitrary cutoff of the top 10. Definitely possible, but seems unlikely, given that a sequel tends to be off the back of a big hit and generally exceeds the performance of its predecessor (Police Academy notwithstanding, I'm fairly certain Mission to Moscow went straight to video)

So what's to explain the over-representation of sequels? A theory:

- Hollywood is going further and further in its effort to launch big mega tent-pole films, the kind that guarantee a big opening weekend, and the best way to guarantee a huge opening weekend is to have a hugely recognizable name/story on the marquee. At the same time, the megastars of the 80's and 90's don't really carry all that much weight anymore. It seems like a big opening is increasingly becoming less about the movie star and more about how many things can explode (I long for the good old days where Arnold would just toss people off a cliff)

Continuing that train of thought, if you're in Hollywood and need to guarantee an opening weekend, and you can't rely on a megastar (either because they're too expensive, they're not effective, or they look stupid in tights), then what do you need to get people in the door?

A sh*t-ton of cultural capital, a back-story everyone knows, everyone's familiar with, and everyone has at least a passing interest in.

There may be lots of other factors as well, stuff like merchandising tie-ins and all that ancillary revenue, but what I do think it comes down to is risk aversion.

If you need to open well to keep your job, then you need as close to a sure thing as possible. And with the notable exception of Pixar, who could put out a movie on anthropomorfic dog crap that I'd go see, no one seems to have earned any credible reputation for original ideas that a mass audience is going to love.

So until that does happen, or until the establishment of some new mega stars (which I'd argue is an impossibility given our always-on media and lack of privacy), get ready for Fast and the Furious 6 and Twilight 9 or whatever.

I'll still see them, but then, I'm mostly in it for the popcorn.

Future of News Follow-up - Associated Press' New Strategy

2011-12-13T11:56:00.000-08:00

If you read my previous post on the future and sustainability of news, one of the things I focused on as potentially being more sustainable were longer form analysis and opinion.

Particularly as companies like Narrative Science and others automate information gathering and basic content creation, reporters will have to focus on adding-more value to whatever they're writing.

Well, the Associated Press recently put out a memo to its staffers talking about it's 'New Distinctiveness' (Link to Article)

It's essentially a memo outlining how the Associated Press will battle for relevancy, and it hits on a lot of themes I was talking about. Below is an excerpt (emphasis mine)

Let's start with something that’s obvious but worth laying out plainly: That "next cycle" we speak of so often in The Associated Press is now. Not 12 hours from the first breaking news, not even six hours, but one, maybe two hours from it -- and maybe even faster than that.

This is hardly something that we’re just waking up to. But it is accelerating by the week. As we look around the media landscape in recent months, over and over we’re seeing the same thing. AP wins when news breaks, but after an hour or two we're often replaced by a piece of content from someone else who has executed something more thoughtful or more innovative. Often it's someone who has taken what we do (sometimes our reporting itself) and pushed it to the next level of content: journalism that's more analytical, maybe a fresh and immediate entry point, a move away from text, a multimedia mashup or a different story form that speaks more directly to users.

Sound familiar?

Some of their specific examples of new strategies are very much along the same lines as to what I was saying:

Thematic Thinking. We're going to be much more aggressive in identifying themes off the news -- angles the world is thinking about -- and digging deeper. Unique and compelling entry points to stories are key here, and those can’t be done on breaking-news autopilot. Many of these new approaches will be infused into the main story on a news event across platforms; that’s as important as creating new stories to stand alone.

Journalism With Voice. We're going to be pushing hard on journalism with voice, with context, with more interpretation. This does not mean that we’re sacrificing any of our deep commitment to unbiased, fair journalism. It does not mean that we're venturing into opinion, either. It does mean that we need to be looking for ways to be more distinctive and stand out in the field -- something our customers need and want. The why and the how of the news are as crucial as the who, what, when and where.

Going Deeper? Breaking-news autopilot? More interpretation?

Agreed. Interesting to see how they'll manage that.

Future of News

2011-12-07T15:51:00.000-08:00

I read a great blog post on the future of news today from Kris Hammond, the CTO of Narrative Science. His thoughts echoed a lot of things I’ve been thinking about and while he said a lot of it better than I can, it made me think that is was long past due for getting some of those thoughts down on digital paper.

Hammond’s main ideas are focused on the future of news, and what I’ve generally been terming ‘information ubiquity’ to anyone who’ll listen.

When I say ubiquity, I’m referring to the idea that information is becoming as readily available as the air we breathe. Technology is allowing us to advance to such a point where facts are increasingly available on a near-instantaneous basis from all kinds of resources. Any basic piece of information, say the capital of Minnesota, is no more than a couple keystrokes, clicks, or words (thanks Siri) away.

One of the points Hammond makes, is that this progression, through successive advancements in technology, will continue to build our repository of facts/data.

“…language understanding and data extraction systems are improving to a point at which much of the information that is currently human readable yet impenetrable to computers will be itself transformed into data; data that can be used as the driver for the generation of new narratives. This means that textual descriptions of events, government meetings, corporate announcements, plus the ongoing stream of social media will be transformed into not just machine readable, but machine understandable representations of what is happening in the world.”

In short, computers will “understand” more and more about the way we communicate, such to turn things into hard data. Think of articles we read, conversations we have, presentations we deliver, these things will start to be just as interpretable to a computer as any other binary code. That fact base I mentioned, capitals of Minnesota and such, will continue to get much bigger.

It’s not only going to get bigger, but more immediately accessible and transparent. Partially aided by the same technology we use today (e.g., manual searching), but also by new technologies Hammond alludes to when he describes ‘the generation of new narratives’

All of this is very exciting…unless you’re in the news business…in which case this may be terrifying.

I say that because facts and basic information are the core tenets of standard objective journalism coverage. In undergrad as a reporter for the Daily Collegian, the routine was pretty simple, go to an event, open your eyes, and write down what happens. Maybe talk to a couple other folks there. Summarize the key points. It’s a role focused on rote gathering and processing of information (Note: this is why I didn’t like reporting and enjoyed being a columnist much much more)

But that rote gathering and processing is what can be drastically reduced in a world where many of those events can now be interpreted systematically by advanced software. It’s already happening in some areas where the content processing can already be automated (basic sports game reports built off of box scores, corporate earnings release previews built off financial data). It’s not hard to imagine these types of reports creating standard, objective summaries for all kinds of events.

But there are a few reasons why I think journalists don’t have to get quite so upset. Although I do think such developments will force a complete realignment in the way we think about journalism, the industry will not go away completely. There are some items, which I expand on below, that I think will become all the more critical for anyone who aspires to a career in journalism or any writing with higher professional standards and paychecks than this blog.

Curation will still matter

Facts are becoming more easily gatherable, storable, and reportable. There’s no way to slow that down. However, with newer and easier ways to gather and report on facts, that’s not just going to create a couple new articles a week, it’s going to create an avalanche of information (if you don’t think things are bad now, just wait!).

Local papers which might run a couple high school baseball recaps might now have the ability to auto-generate five pages of stories including all the local high school games, little league games, and 3-year old T-ball games (In which the lead might be: “The Dolphins defeated the Pirates by a score of 5-4. Jacob Marshall scored the tying run when his ground ball to second base was interrupted by a butterfly that distracted the entire Pirates infield. Juice boxes and orange slices were had by all.”)

So if such articles become easily creatable, you’ll suddenly be faced with more and more of them competing for your attention. Someone’s going to have to help you out, unless you want to quit your job to drink from the media fire hose full-time (a move I’ve often contemplated)

There is absolutely a role for someone to help decide which articles are the most critical for your attention. Taking it back a step, there’s also a critical role for someone to decide which of these easily gathered facts are worthy of an article to even fight for your attention. In my view, that’s a role that could potentially be filled by a human filter.

With that said, there are technology solutions which can also get the job done. The first counter-argument to this type of role would be that we’ll source all our information from our social media channels (e.g., friends on Twitter, Facebook shares). Companies like Flipboard are already trying to build experiences that allow users to get the media they want before they specifically ask for it. So certainly there will be competing forces trying to deliver the information you need/want, but I feel as though there will continue to be a need for curators who aggregate the fire hose and bottle it for you.

Long form and analysis will still matter

Some information is becoming relatively standardized, and more pieces traditionally within the purview of the journalist will continue to shift. Speeches from a public figure, which today are covered by reporters, may one day be recapped automatically (I look forward to someday when a presidential candidate creates a series of system errors in the natural language interpretation software through either making up words or stringing together illogical phrases)

But while these pieces of data become more collectible, it’s hard to imagine a software program creating the traditional longer stories. Feature stories which come from finding sources, interviewing them, and asking the right questions. Investigative journalism, which should be greatly enhanced with increased data availability, should obviously still have a home. That’s not to say data mining technology or advanced narrative creation can’t be created to do it, but for the time being, I don’t think computers are ready for prime time. If anything, programs to create basic content should free up more resources which can allow for deeper investigations, and more effort around hunting for really impactful news.

Unless there’s a Woodwardbot and Bernsteintron in some technology company’s lab right now.

Having an opinion will still matter (as long as you can entertain)

The last way to keep a position in journalism is the most obvious, and the one that stretches further away from what journalism is at its core. It’s really just about being an entertaining writer and offering something no one else can.

One of the clear trends over the last few years in traditional print media (at least that which I’m reading), is a progression towards more opinion and personalized writing styles. This happens beyond print, as any viewer of ESPN can tell you. Writers, at least those that develop consistent followings, are those which cultivate their own personal style and in many cases, more opinion-based takes on their field.

If you look at regional sports coverage, I’ve noticed a huge shift in the reporters’ tone and styling as they’ve moved to do more blogging and tweeting. The game recap, that is, telling me exactly what happened, has become pretty irrelevant to me, but I do look to these trusted sources for their opinion on what happened. I also like interacting with them via Twitter, live chats, etc.

That builds my relationship with them as a fan, and I’ll continue to seek them out for what they have to say.

Of course, one could argue this has some seriously negative ramifications for sports writing as a whole. In particular, an encouragement towards attention-grabbing statements, inflammatory rhetoric, and basically the Stephen A. Smithing of the content. To which I’d say, I think that ship has already sailed.

Summation

While the advancement of technology has brought an end to many occupations, the buggy whip maker, the elevator operator, and others, recent development should not suggest that reporters will make a similar path to extinction.

True, the type of work may change, and the profile of those who belong in the field may shift as technology becomes a greater tool in the media arsenal. But just because technology will soon allow for the codification of many forms of information you once could only understand by being there, there will still be plenty of original thoughts to have, and words to write.

Of course if that’s not true, you can always start a blog. I guarantee your mom will read it.

Does a bear sh*t in the woods? An ape sure does!

2011-11-05T09:37:00.000-07:00

Last week my wife and I took a short trip out to Southern California for a few days. In part, to celebrate my 30th birthday, and in part, because we had free Starwood resort nights to use thanks to my time in Arkansas at the Aloft Rogers.

Although we'd been to Southern California twice in the past 6-8 weeks for two weddings, we ended up scheduling a third trip for the free resort nights. That might seem odd, but here was our thought process.

Step 1: We have free resort nights, what are the nicest hotels we can go to?

Step 2: Now, which of all those locations have the cheapest air fare?

Step 3: Thanks to Virgin America, flights from Chicago to LAX are much cheaper than Phoenix, Colorado, basically everywhere.

Step 4: Confirm free resort nights at the St. Regis Monarch Beach California.

So we were going going, back back, to Cali Cali. No qualms from me, I was happy to stay at a nice resort with what would hopefully be some nice weather.

I'd say we definitely got pretty good weather, and managed to squeeze in a ton of stuff into a short trip.

First things first, we hit a local hole in the wall for lunch

OK, so you may have heard of In-N-Out burger, but my wife had never been there. And even though I was still looking to cross other fast food outlets off my hit list (I'll get you someday Jack in the Box!), we found a spot not too far from our hotel.

A major highlight of our trip was heading down to San Diego, which we had never been to and was only ~1.5 hours from our hotel. We didn't have a ton of time there, and there were no baseball games (as I was hoping the stadium would implode on Tony Larussa, Pujols and the rest of those St. Louis tea partiers)

So we went to the zoo instead, and it was far and away the best zoo I've ever been to. Maybe it was the fact that I haven't been to a real zoo since my poor mom used to take all four of us kids to the Philadelphia zoo and probably question some of her life choices. But the San Diego Zoo was a ton of fun.

We got to see tons of animals, some of which I didn't know existed and most of which I've never even eaten.

There were lots of good exhibits, although I do think they dedicated a lot of space to birds. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like birds at a zoo are kind of a waste. Rationale:

- They're small
- They don't do much
- They need large completely fenced in cages because they'll almost definitely try to fly away

I think when zoo builders are planning out their exhibits, they must be like:

Zoo Builder 1: "OK, this will be great, we'll have the gorilla enclosure here, and then 300 feet down will be the giraffes"

Zoo Builder 2: "What do we put in between?"

Zoo Builder 1: "F*ck, who cares? Throw another bird cage in there"

No one gets excited for birds (exceptions made for penguins, flamingos, and perhaps emus, obviously).

Anyway, despite the overload of small children, the zoo was full of wonder and mystery. Exhibit A, this sign:

I kind of wanted to see that happen, but I didn't bring a poncho.

Of course, that's not to say we didn't see some serious raw stuff.

We saw a rhino try to get his mate to get down in the biblical sense. At least I'm hoping it was a mate, but maybe it was just a casual friend from work or another rhino he met on craigslist. Regardless, this one rhino wanted to get into it like a Seaside Heights guido after a couple red bull and vodkas. It was pretty hilarious, especially watching him get shot down by the girl rhino who was more interested in sleeping (see, they're just like us!)

After that, other animals found it pretty hard to top the rhino. The poor zebra across the way, he was depressed, I'm assuming from having to look at that monster all day and feel inadequate.

But the rhino, with his massive wang, was no match for the show stopper of the day. The last animal we checked out, and as it turned out, the one with the most hilarious show. I'm talking about the gorilla cage. We wandered past as the zoo was closing, and saw the biggest one, the alpha male I'm assuming. He was just hanging around, likely killing time until the zoo closed and he could head back in and catch up on his DVR'd episodes of 2 Broke Girls.

But I think he saw us and wanted to give us something to remember. Either that or he has recently been to a Jamba Juice

What a fun trip we had.

Found my Friends, Even the Adulturous Ones

2011-10-17T11:50:00.000-07:00

I upgraded to the new iPhone operating system last week, after a lengthy wait when the whole world tried to do it at the same time.

The new iOS has some pretty cool new additions, most of which should add some incremental value to my phone, but largely not earth-shattering.

However, one of the newest Apps for the phone might be earth-shattering for my life if I can play my cards right.

Maybe, just maybe, I can start to persuade my wife to get an iPhone, thanks to the new Find My Friends app.

If you don't know anything about Find My Friends, it's the app that let's you geo-locate your friends who also have iPhones, and place their approximate location on a map.

A great advancement in technology for the obsessives, suspicious, and introverted among us.

The app essentially eliminates the need to actually talk to people to find out where they are, and completely destroys the boundaries between friends that Facebook didn't already obliterate.

Want to hang out with a friend but they're ditching your calls? Find Your Friend on the iPhone and just show up to what will assuredly be an awkward encounter.

This app creates a new threshold in friend-dom, or the friend hierarchy, or levels of friendship. Because you'll really have to be friends with someone to give them your geo-location data. Want to be Facebook or LinkedIn connections with someone? No big deal, you're not obligated to share any personal details with them.

But if my understanding of Find My Friends is correct, if that person's your friend, you're giving them the ability to...

a) Drop by a bar where you're hanging out

b) Know exactly when they can drop by your apartment because you'll be there

c) Know exactly when they can drop by your apartment because you WON'T be there, and they can steal all your stuff

Requesting a Find My Friends friendship with someone would be the true test of how much you want that person in your life, because there doesn't seem to be any in-between. Either they know where your phone is at all times, or they can never find you. Doesn't leave a lot of room for pseudo-friends and acquaintances.

With that said, I'm really hoping for some interesting mash-ups with other technology services.

With TripAdvisor - Find My Fellow Travelers

With Craigslist - Find My Casual Encounters

With the State Sex Offender Registry - Find My Child Predators

I'm also looking forward to more stores about people using Find My Friends for unforeseen purposes. We've already had the first cheating spouse caught, so I'm looking forward to the first robbed apartment while they were out story, the first guilt established by geo-location at the scene of the crime story, and the first stalker found me now I'm suing Apple story. Remember to read your user agreements.

But anyway, with all that said, I'm kind of excited for Find My Friends. Because, while I can't think of a lot of people who would really care where I am, I know with 100% certainty that my wife cares a lot.

And since she knows I don't go anywhere without my phone, she would definitely be interested in using that app (and not in a 'I need to check on my loser husband way, more of a 'Which state is my husband in now and can we confirm his plane didn't go down in a massive fireball' kind of way).

Find My Friends offers that opportunity, and maybe that could convert her.

Then maybe she'd have her own phone and would stop playing games on mine!

First Use of Square

2011-10-07T12:13:00.000-07:00

I had my first experience with Square last night.

No, not the shape, I think it's safe to say I've been comfortable with squares ever since they passed me through nursery school. It's also not a new trendy bar where all the glasses/chairs/menu items are squares and there's a whole irony thing about being in a cool place named 'Square' (note to self: file that under foolproof business ideas for later)

I was referring to the mobile payment system designed and built around processing credit card payments via smartphone.

I was making the weekly run from O'Hare to downtown Chicago, and had already recovered from the absurd cab line and stop and go traffic this city has to offer. As we arrived at my destination, I went on full auto pilot for the payment, starting to push the buttons for credit card on the little terminal in the backseat.

I've gotten used to ignoring most cab drivers when I reach for the credit card, because 90% of the time they're trying to explain why their machine is broken or why they'd prefer to take me to a cash machine or some other elaborate reasoning not to use plastic.

Because of that, I didn't notice initially when the cab driver started waving his iPhone at me.

It took me a second to realize what the heck he was up to. But then I noticed the little white dongle (I believe that's an official term), plugged into the phone.

It was a Square card swiper, and although I had read all about them, I had never actually gotten to use one before.

It was surprisingly simple. I ran my card through the little dongle, and then (the one weird part), signed my name on the phone with my finger. That would probably be a little weird for most people, but I was helped by the fact that my signature is a mess anyway. Using one finger instead of all five and a pen wasn't that much of a quality drop-off.

It was pretty seamless, and then I got to decide whether I wanted my receipt as a text or via email. Either way, I wondered if this guy was going to end up with a record of my phone number/email address somewhere. I also wondered what the heck I would do with a text message receipt. Not sure how I'd send that in to the people in our expense department, so I opted for the email.

As long as our expense department doesn't look at the receipt and assumed I'm making it up, I'll officially be on board with this Square thing. Especially if it means more cab drivers will start asking me to swipe a credit card instead of pretending it's not an option

New TSA Security PreCheck Program Sounds Amazing

2011-10-05T18:52:00.000-07:00

Oh cruel fate, you dealt me a crushing blow.

For months I was atwitter with anticipation. The TSA had dribbled out precious little information on their new expedited security program, but I had a golden ticket!

I had gotten the email to opt-in, apparently due to the fact that constant flights from Chicago to Bentonville Arkansas and back indicate a lack of major security risks.

But the solicitation didn't explain what the expedited security process would be, only that it would be in a couple airports and certain American Airlines frequent fliers would be eligible.

As previously noted in this space, DFW was one of the airports on the list for the pilot program. As also previously noted, I was going to be traveling through DFW this past weekend.

You have no idea how excited I was at the potential chance to use expedited security. A true testament to the uber-travel nerd I've become in two years of management consulting.

But yet, I mentioned a crushing blow and something about fate. Indeed.

You see my wife and I got to DFW, where I secretly hoped for a rolled-out red carpet and free champagne for expedited security folk (or if nothing else, at least a shoes-on security line).

Instead, no fanfare, no big band, and nothing special.

I hoped something magical would happen as I checked-in at the kiosk. In place of a boarding pass, a Willy Wonka style golden ticket perhaps? Or some kind of expert-traveler hall monitor-esque sash? What about a crapload of rainbows?

Nothing beyond the dull echo of roller bags wheeling around.

'What gives?' I thought, where the heck was all this pilot program stuff???

As I learned today, the TSA PreCheck program is wonderful in nearly every way I could've imagined.

They just didn't start it until the day after I flew out of DFW.

But while it's too late for me to take advantage on my trip, it doesn't mean the program is without merit! Far from it, as I learned from catching up on the travel news!

I watched the news report with envy as I read off the new conditions for the privileged.

No need to remove:

Shoes
Belt
Light Outerwear
3-1-1 Compliant Bag
Laptop from Carry-on

Holy macaroni! The sign in the video was so pretty I could cry.

No taking off shoes, or belts, or jackets, or removing laptop computers, or liquid bags. NONE OF IT!

It's like the travel gods heard all of the prayers coming from weary consultants, auditors, salesmen, and rationally intelligent people everywhere!

I don't care what information I'd have to give the TSA. I'd give them dibs on my first born for this kind of thing! I'll pay anything, absolutely anything, to have that everywhere.

I just booked tickets to my brother's graduation in May.

The airport...ATL, another member of the pilot program.

I'm counting down the days.

Update on New Quicker TSA Screening Program

2011-09-20T19:13:00.000-07:00

A few weeks ago I wrote about a mysterious email invitation I got from American Airlines to invite me to opt-in to a new airport security pilot program.

The email was vague, but promised the potential for reduced time in security lines at Dallas Fort Worth and Miami airports.

Because I'm flying through DFW in a few weeks, I eagerly accepted.

Today I read an article that provided a little more detail on the program (if unfortunately, no details on what exactly it will involve)

Under the so-called "known traveler" program, some 6,000 to 8,000 frequent flyers at select airports will be directed daily toward dedicated lines that will zip them through security faster than you can get your shoes, coat and watch off and into the bins.

Only a chosen few of frequent flyers from AMR Corp.'s (AMR) American Airlines and Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL) and members of the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol's trusted traveler program are being invited to join the TSA program--for free right now. The pilot program, which is open exclusively to U.S. citizens, will operate only at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International, Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County, Miami International and Dallas-Fort Worth International airports.

Seems pretty small for now, but the article also mentions they might roll out to more airlines and airports if it works.

Of course, there's the inevitable downside to this program.

Not the fact that you'd need to sacrifice lots of personal information. We're all on Facebook. That ship has sailed.

But the fact that if they try this out and it works, they'll start charging for it.

Also from the article.

TSA's website states that the known-travelers program is a work in progress and evolving as lessons are learned. And while it's free in its test stages, there's little doubt a fee ranging from $100 to $150 for processing to another $100 to $150 in annual or periodic fees will be tied to a full-fledged program. Pistole did not offer costs but noted that the program would include a fee.

Bummer.

But honestly, if airlines can get me to pay for a checked bag, or get me to pay for early boarding (I'm looking at you Southwest), then you can be real sure I'll be first in line for a faster security program, even if it's a couple hundred bucks.

Plus, I bet I'll be able to expense that.

Moving to Costa Rica for Online Poker?

2011-09-18T09:39:00.000-07:00

I used to play a fair amount of online poker. This was a while ago, around 2004-2005 or so, so 6-7 years ago (wow, I am old). But it was the golden age of online poker, as ESPN's new camera actually made televised poker interesting, and the availability of internet poker allowed so many of us to indulge our Rounders fantasies of rolling up a stake and heading to the World Series.

The game exploded, which was great for anyone who actually did a little homework or could do a little probability math in their head. Tons of people flocked to all different kinds of sites, although I remember Party Poker seemed the largest at the time. I think they even advertised on TV (Note: Indeed they did. I forgot about their 'oooooooh Party Poker!' jingle)

And I liked playing, for a while. But the game is a fickle mistress, and I eventually had to end our relationship. If for nothing else, my desk was taking a beating from all the punches I threw after particularly bad beats. It's not that I wasn't a decent player (38-40% ITM across my SNG's, which if I remember correctly is a pretty good clip [For those unfamiliar, ITM refers to my in-the-money percentage, or the number of tournaments where you take home prize money. SNGs refer to Sit-N-Go's, a tournament that starts immediately once enough players join. I really only played one table sit n go's, which would take 10 players and pay out the top three])

I stopped playing because, while I liked the game, I didn't see what I was really getting out of it. I never played for serious financial stakes (risk-averse, sue me), so the potential rewards were never that big. And even if it as great to outplay someone (or even to get lucky), a win only leaves you with smug self-satisfaction as you sit alone at your computer. What does that really get you at the end of the day? (Answer: Not a girlfriend)

So I cashed out, and was content to play only when I'm at a casino.

However, I do still pay attention to developments in the online poker world, particularly the legal problems it's been facing.

The U.S. government really doesn't like online poker. Leaving out their rationale (which I think is absurd, short-sighted, and hypocritical), they don't want U.S. customers playing poker online.

Recently, the feds shut down the biggest poker sites around the country in what industry players refer to as 'Black Friday'.

Bad news. Particularly for people who gave up other potential careers to 'play online full-time'.

While I typically don't like to generalize, the full-time online player has been profiled enough times in enough articles that I could tell you exactly how any of them will be described in any article that talks about the situation.

Rules for profiling an online poker player in popular media

1: They have to be young, in their 20's usually

2: They have to have abandoned a traditional career path. This is almost always college, but sometimes could also include a job of some kind

3: You have to talk about how they'll play multiple tables at the same time

4: You have to talk about how their parents don't really 'get it'

5: You have to talk about how much money they've made (which will be some ungodly high number, I'm guessing which is self-reported by someone who certainly doesn't want to tell you if they aren't making money)

All poker profiles will have those items, pretty much without exception.

But that wasn't what got me thinking about poker. It was this article in BusinessWeek, an article detailing how poker players are relocating to other countries where they can continue to play online.

What I'm trying to figure out, is if some of the U.S. legal action will have an impact on pro poker players ability to earn the same amount as they did previously.

The article focuses on a couple guys who are now in Costa Rica to play poker. Now, they obviously did this because they want to keep making money the 'easy' way (if by 'easy' you think sitting in front of dual computer monitors for long shifts without leaving the house sounds 'easy').

But isn't it going to be harder to do that now?

When the U.S. basically shut down major online poker sites, they effectively raised the costs of playing online poker for all American players. If you really wanted to play, you'd have to find another site, move your money around, and have questions as to whether the new site would actually be trustworthy. This wouldn't really stop the professionals, who you can assume will usually find a way to play. But the additional transition costs, combined with a new federal government boogeyman hovering over your poker budget, would be enough to scare the amateur, no?

And aren't amateur players how the professionals make most of their money?

So if all of a sudden these guys and girls leave, does the quality of competition improve? And do expected winnings decline as a result? If the online poker community is mostly international, maybe it's not an issue, but I've always assumed it's been primarily American.

I certainly would've thought about that before I moved to Costa Rica. But then, some of us have other employment options.

An All Simpsons TV Channel

2011-09-14T19:48:00.000-07:00

From the LA Times, an idea who's time has long since come.

Ready for a channel devoted to nothing but "The Simpsons?"

Don't laugh, it is one idea News Corp. Chief Operating Officer Chase Carey threw out when speaking Tuesday at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Media Communications & Entertainment Conference in Beverly Hills...

...Carey said there have been a "number of meetings" to determine how to capitalize on its library of episodes of "The Simpsons" and he mentioned a digital channel featuring nothing but Homer and the gang as being a possibility. Carey said it is incumbent on the company to take advantage of a show that is "unique in television with a volume too that is unprecedented."

Let me be the first to say I would welcome our new animated TV overlords.

Anyone who's seen the 24 hour Seinfeld marathon understands the wonder and promise of a sole show television station. I remember the Seinfeld marathon well. Anytime you flipped around the TV, there Jerry was! It was a glorious time to be alive. And as I watched it, I was pretty sure that I would always watch it, anytime, even if it ran 365 days a year.

We're rapidly progressing to a world where one screen of entertainment isn't enough. I didn't get this way until 2009 when I started using my laptop while watching TV, but advances in smartphones and tablet computers should pretty much ensure that within 5 years we're all using two screens at a minimum when we're in the living room.

In such a setup, I place a premium on what I'd call, 'ambient content'. Stuff that I don't have to pay 100% attention to, because I have another screen that simply can't be ignored (e.g., Words With Friends). This is very different from what I'd think of as 'appointment viewing,' which are shows that you're so into you have to specifically set everything down and watch them (few and far between).

But as far as background content goes, sports is a pretty great ambient TV solution. It's always on, and rarely requires your full attention (which is why it's so popular at gyms). Of course, once you're married it becomes less a solution and more of a test to see how long before your wife explodes.

News programming also works, think anything with a talking head and a ticker. That's always my default when I'm on the treadmill and I can't find any sports.

And then, there's also comfortable programming, stuff that doesn't require a ton of thought or direct involvement. It's here where I'd put shows that have been on forever, with an established set of characters and plotlines.

I can watch any episode of Seinfeld and tell you the entire thing after about 2 seconds. Now, that may be really sad as an example of humanity, but my familiarity and comfort with it means that I would always be willing to have it on. The same thing could be said for a Simpsons channel.

Now, a 24-7 channel with nothing but the Simpsons would be fantastic, although I'm wondering exactly what the revenue possibilities are. The Simpsons must generate close to a bazillion dollars in syndication right now (looking for some answers online only gave me an estimate of $1 billion, and that was from 2003). It would be hard to see a model where Fox launches some kind of standard TV channel that would clearly undercut the syndicated value. From the article, I infer the execs are talking about incremental revenue streams.

Could they offer on-demand access to any/all episodes? Or unlimited access to some Hulu-like channel? Or hell, just put the episodes on Hulu itself?

They absolutely could, although I don't know if it would work quite as well.

You see, putting your content into the on-demand sphere forces a pretty big change in the user discovery/experience. When it's simply on TV, I'll stumble across it on my cable guide. But now in an on-demand world, all of a sudden I have to actively seek out the show. And what's worse, but in a completely on-demand environment, I'd have to choose from hundreds of episodes! The paralysis of expanded choice would set in, and I'm sure I'd probably never click through to an episode (incidentally, the same reason why it's so hard to watch a non-continuous plotline show on DVD. If I want to watch the Wire or West Wing [or another show that doesn't start with W], I can start at the beginning, set it and forget it. Not so with a show like the Simpsons or Seinfeld)

Such an on-demand solution from Fox would be interesting (and who knows, maybe this isn't what they're thinking about at all), but I feel as though it would be much harder to attract viewers. When you put it on-demand, you force me as a consumer to go out and find it. But honestly? I'm trying to watch TV...I didn't turn it on to do any work.

DirecTV NFL Sunday Ticket

2011-09-12T18:49:00.000-07:00

It seems like DirecTV has gotten really aggressive this year with pitching themselves, and in particular, NFL Sunday Ticket.

NFL Sunday Ticket, in case you don't know, is the only way to ensure you can see principally all the NFL games each week. Historically, it's been a godsend to nomads like me, people who have emigrated from their hometowns to settle in the savage and unforgiving wilderness (in my case, Chicago).

Of course, it's always been pretty expensive. And it also required you to get TV service through satellite, which isn't even an option for most of us in apartments.

But DirecTV has been willing to pay the NFL a fortune to be the exclusive provider, and since the NFL is in the interest of making money, DirecTV gets a monopoly on providing comprehensive coverage.

But lately, I've noticed a harder pitch from the satellite company.

Exhibit A: Recent offers of Free NFL Sunday Ticket for subscribers (caveat in that it requires a two year agreement and is only for new subscribers, so you can see why it's worth it for them)

Exhibit B: NFL Sunday Ticket To Go - An idea which seems to be an unlikely offer from a TV service provider...Streaming over mobile devices and even things like a PS3. The price is pretty outrageous (over $300 if I remember correctly), but one of the first breakthroughs for those of us waiting to get the NFL through something other than a traditional TV channel (finally following the NHL and MLB and basically every other sport out there)

Exhibit C: An email offer I got today offering me 12,500 American Airlines bonus miles if I got DirecTV. They must really know me well to come after me with streaming access AND airline miles!

Now it's possible they've done this type of stuff every year, but I really can't recall these types of promotions for what's really the company's only unique product offering.

Two questions come to mind. Well, one question and one comment.

How is the wider availability of NFL Red Zone impacting DirecTV's NFL Sunday Ticket package?

My dad got the Red Zone channel at least a couple seasons ago, and last year, with an Eagles Thursday night matchup on the docket, I forked over the extra $8 a month for the sports package to get it and the NFL network.

And to me, the Red Zone channel has all but destroyed any inkling I'd ever have of getting Sunday Ticket.

The Red Zone channel just shows football, continuously, as long as there's a game on. Cutting from one game to another, it's like football nirvana (except for those who need the occasional bathroom or 'my wife's trying to talk to me' break)

So it's better than DirecTV, and at ~$8 a month, it's a lot cheaper than $300+.

The only argument is that you can't watch an entire game of your favorite team, but since I'm an Eagles fan, I get most of them on national broadcasts anyway. So until they start going 6-10 every year, I'm pretty OK with the access I've got.

So, since I'm a football fan, and Red Zone has completely won me over, is that why we're seeing such aggressive promotion tactics? It's also worth noting that DirecTV seems to have rolled out a ton of additional features and wrinkles (like a player stat tracker for fantasy purposes, or access to coaches' pre-game shows), obviously including their streaming access as well.

Could it be they're starting to feel the heat from some (albeit slightly indirect) competition?

While I think it's pretty safe to say yes, I also noticed this article.

It's the first NFL Sunday of the season, and DirecTV's $350 Sunday Ticket To-Go doesn't work.

We bought the $350 service — which lets users watch every NFL game on their computer or mobile device — over the weekend, and were hoping to use it for a kick-ass live blog complete with scores, commentary, and highlights.

But instead, we can't even sign into To-Go because the "Start Watching" button on the website is disabled.

A ton of users are having this problem, and DirecTV is getting killed for it on this forum.

Oy.

If you're going to launch a new product, and it's going to be a major focal point of your ad campaign, and it's going to be purchased primarily by tech-savvy early adopters...you have to make sure the freaking thing works!

Obviously, that's obvious. And I'm sure someone has been fired, disciplined, or buried in the desert for it. But that type of thing just pushes me further away from considering the technology.

And that's kind of a shame. Because I had seriously been considering buying a PS3, and getting our own Wi-fi network, just to pay DirecTV over $300 for NFL Sunday Ticket.

But I'm happy with Red Zone, and while my wife isn't happy with football in general, she'll at least be glad to hear I won't be able to watch it on my phone.

New Amazon Delivery System Could Lead to...More Buffalo Chicken Wraps!

2011-09-06T20:24:00.000-07:00

I stumbled across a report today about a new project Amazon is working on, one that has pretty cool implications for my life and the lives of other yuppies everywhere.

No, it's not their new tablet (although that also sounds pretty cool)

New Delivery Lockers

As the report explains, a Seattle 7-11 store has a bank of lockers in the back. The lockers will serve as a drop-off point for Amazon purchases, and allows the customer to select a drop off location, receive a bar code via smartphone, and use it to pick up the package.

It's unclear whether they based their design for the system off a complete analysis of my life, but it seems highly likely at this point.

What this would mean is the end of package receiving as we know it for tons of city dwellers everywhere. For those of us who live in high-rise apartments, it means we finally might have somewhere else to pick up a package beyond the cramped building receiving room run by the dry cleaner downstairs (which would allow them to focus on ripping you off for your dry cleaning instead of manhandling your packages).

That's been one of my biggest hesitations around ordering from Amazon for certain items, the fact that it comes to my dry cleaner downstairs. A dry cleaner who closes at 6 (i.e., before people with jobs get home), and isn't open on Sundays. This would free up a good 20 minutes of my Saturday morning when I ask the dry cleaning lady for our packages and then she stumbles around trying to find where they might be.

The idea that I can just walk a block over to my 7-11 and pick up the packages on my own terms. Xanadu!

Of course, the idea is not without its questions.

Is there going to be a time limit for picking up your packages? I'm a self-entitled elitist liberal, which means I order a lot of books but I want them on my terms!

Also a concern, is whether a bunch of package lockers that hold Amazon goods would attract people who would love to crack me over the head and take the contents of my locker. To them, it could be anything and could be super expensive (even if it's just a used copy of Tina Fey's Bossypants.

And couldn't people use this service for evil? I don't know Amazon's shipping policy or security all that well, but I feel like that merits looking into, just to ensure I don't go over to the 7-11 and pick up my books right next to some enriched uranium.

Lastly, and this might just be me, but building Amazon lockers in 7-11 stores would dramatically increase my exposure to 7-11. Normally not a bad thing, but I have a habit of buying their Buffalo Chicken Wraps for meals when I don't want to make anything or walk across the street to Jimmy John's. And for whatever reason, buying them drives my wife absolutely crazy (not that she has to eat them, just that I'm willing to). It gets her unusually upset.

Maybe if I buy her gifts from Amazon, she'll be OK with it

Football Auction

2011-09-02T17:05:00.000-07:00

God, another dollar. And then another. Then a few more. It was so much, was it worth it? My wallet was emptying faster and faster. But I couldn't just stand there.

I needed a freaking running back!

My fantasy football league switched to an auction style format last year. After trying it, I've become convinced it is absolutely the only way to go. Now that most of the readers have realized this is about fantasy football, I'm sure most have already X'ed out their browser (particularly the wife), but I still care a lot about it (much to her dismay). But doing an auction draft is just so much fun, maybe it requires a bit of an explanation.

In fantasy football, you build a team of NFL players who, based on their play each week, earn you points. Things like touchdowns are really good and earn a bunch of points. Other things like fumbles are bad, they can lose you points. Each week you face off against a different opponent from your league, one-on-one, and try to set the best lineup to get more points than your opponent (which can make for good trash talking).

The draft is how you build your roster, and in an auction format, you're awarded a certain budget to start with, and as each player gets nominated by someone in the league, you have the freedom to bid however much you'd like to have them on your team. It opens up a whole new world for fantasy football players who are used to randomly ordered drafts, where you just take turns selecting, in that you are now free to pursue all kinds of strategies and aren't limited by your draft slot.

Want to build around a franchise quarterback? Or two stud wide receivers? Or maybe a great kicker? (Hint: Don't try that last one) But that's the idea, that you have so much more flexibility in what you can do and how you can build your team. (As an aside, our league also adds some more complexity by adding 'keepers', players you can keep on your team from last year's roster for a certain raise over the price you paid last year. Again, it opens more strategic options)

Only one thing annoyed me about last year's draft, and all fantasy football drafts, was that I couldn't remember exactly how I approached it. I know how I felt about some players, and why I tried to acquire others, but the memory was a little hazy and probably falls victim to revisionist history (e.g., of course I didn't pick that guy who ended up sucking, I knew he would be terrible) Well, I don't want that this time. So I thought it would be helpful to quickly blog up some notes on how the draft went. Not for you guys, who almost assuredly won't care, but for me. If nothing else, it'll keep me honest and I can't pretend like I knew Felix Jones was going to rush for 2000 yards.

Below I've listed out the draft picks in the order they were selected, complete with the price someone ended up paying for them. I've also included my recollections, and also bolded the players which I took.

A couple of notes. You'll notice some major players aren't listed here (Tom Brady for example). That's because of those keepers that I mentioned. In my case, I kept Michael Vick ($5), Mike Wallace ($23), and Mike Williams ($5), so I already had a quarterback and two wide receivers. Also, our league is slightly different from most in that we are what's called a PPR league. PPR refers to point-per-reception, which means that each catch by a running back or receiver is worth a fantasy point, whereas in many leagues they are worth nothing. Just mentioning because it skews the pricing on some of those players (those with lots of catches are more valuable obviously).

What I mean by all this is, don't call me totally crazy.

Pick Player Cost

1 Rashard Mendenhall (Pit - RB) $38 - The first person up for auction is an interesting case, as no relative prices have been set. There's a school of thought that you should definitely try to buy a big name guy if available early in the draft, because bidders might be skittish about paying a lot. That may be what happened here for Mendenhall, who's not typically thought of as a top 5 guy but had a good year last year. I don't like him because a) he's a Steeler, b) he had a ton of carries last year and may have a greater likelihood of getting hurt, and c) I don't think he gets a lot of receptions (which is a big theme for me). So I passed entirely.

2 Adrian Peterson (Min - RB) $52 - AP is a well known fantasy stud. He's been very consistent, always rushing for a ton of yards. But again, not a big receiving threat, so I didn't really want to jump this early. The guy I really wanted was Ray Rice, who hadn't been put up yet. Rice always catches a lot of passes, and will also rush for a bunch of yards on a decent team. Let's cut to the chase, I had a Rice crush.

3 Chris Johnson (Ten - RB) $47 - Big play threat, but was holding out this year (and then agreed to a contract after we were done). Again, I know he's a great RB, but I wanted more of a pass catching threat.

4 Drew Brees (NO - QB) $32 - Now a player I was finally happy to see. While I coveted Rice, I also wanted everyone else to spend as much as possible to leave me in a position to outbid others for him. To me, the key to that was nominating players at positions I already had. Brees was a textbook case of that, given I already had Vick. I was thrilled to see him out there with other people bidding on him.

5 Calvin Johnson (Det - WR) $39 - Another non-running back at a position I already had two players! This was actually my nomination, and I threw him out because I knew we didn't have a lot of available WRs in our league. I was thrilled to see the bidding get to $39, thinking that Rice would be the next RB available and I would be in a good position to grab him (long story short, I had one of the highest budgets because of my cheap keepers)

6 Maurice Jones-Drew (Jac - RB) $32 - A bit of a surprise to see him nominated, as he's lower on the rankings. He's a guy I desperately wanted last year and wasn't able to get (hint: he catches a lot of passes). But there are concerns about his health, and the Jaguars aren't particularly good, so I didn't really want to grab him, and again, I was waiting on Rice.

7 Jason Witten (Dal - TE) $19 - A great tight end, but man, I wasn't sure I wanted to spend a lot of money on a tight end when I could get one really cheaply much later in the draft. But damn, I think he's going to have a pretty good year. He's also a Cowboy though, and owning him in previous years was never fun to see him against the Eagles.

8 Ray Rice (Bal - RB) $71 - The guy I was waiting and saving for, and I couldn't bring myself to get him. That's not a misprint. He went for over $70, and by the way, our standard budget is $200. The bidding got really crazy, and while I gained infamy in our league for paying around that much for him last year, I couldn't bring myself to do it again. He had been the centerpiece of my strategy, but apparently he got around. I still think he'll have a great year, just sadly, not for me.

9 Nate Kaeding (SD - K) $2 - Yeah, a kicker. Actually not a bad strategy to nominate one and try and buy them for a dollar. If someone else bids, they spend more of their budget and you'll just get another one. But you have to endure the complaints from the other guys for nominating one. So I usually pass.

10 Antonio Gates (SD - TE) $36 - Again, a stud TE, but wow. Too rich for my blood.

11 Michael Turner (Atl - RB) $41 - I don't know what it is about him, but I've always hated this guy for my fantasy team. Never wanted to ever get close, and wasn't about to start.

12 Shonn Greene (NYJ - RB) $27 - $27 may be a pretty good deal for this guy, but I wanted a pass catcher and I was sick of waiting

13 Steven Jackson (StL - RB) $38 - Finally, my first purchase. My strategy going in had been to spend a bunch on two stud running backs, because I was pretty set on QB and WR. Then of course, I waited for Rice and wasn't able to get him. So I quickly needed to get myself some talent at running back. I wanted a pass catching running back, and Steven Jackson does that. Plus, everyone's expecting big things from the Rams this year, and I guess I'm no different. For the same price as Mendenhall, a guy I don't like as much, I was able to get a guy who I'm now trusting to carry me. Hope I don't regret not buying Rice.

14 Peyton Manning (Ind - QB) $19 - Another QB, good news for me. Of course, this doesn't begin to describe the panic that set in when I bid on Manning and the auction clock got to two seconds before someone else bid. I was trying to push the price up, and almost got cracked with an expensive backup QB (although, it wouldn't have been the worst thing for me with a guaranteed injury victim like Vick).

15 Matt Forte (Chi - RB) $44 - My second acquisition. Another ride on the Matt Forte Pain Train. I just can't help it, he's too tempting a pass catcher to let go. I ended up in a bidding war with another guy over him, I'm guessing he thought along the same lines as I did. But as someone who had Forte last year, I should've been able to convince him that it's not worth it. The guy has so much potential, but last year the combination of his terrible offensive line and Chester Taylor (scourge of 3rd down carries), got me perpetually upset at every Bears game (could've been worse, I could've been a Bears fan). But, I can't resist, even if it cost me more than Steven Jackson. He could catch 60-80 passes this year. Once I got into the game, things stabilized a little bit. In a reflection of that, my notes will now be a little more concise.

16 DeSean Jackson (Phi - WR) $26 - Love him as a player, would hate to own him in fantasy. The guy weighs less than I do.

17 Frank Gore (SF - RB) $37 - Miffed to see the next running back go for less than Matt Forte, but what could I say, free markets.

18 Miles Austin (Dal - WR) $31 - Another big time WR I was happy to see go for more than $30. Again, don't like those Cowboys

19 Wes Welker (NE - WR) $29 - I bid a fair amount of Wes Welker, who I used to love as a Miami Dolphin, then hated once he joined the showboating Patriots train of jackwagons. But he's really really good in our type of league. I tried to get him, but as the price rose, I really thought about some of the other wideouts still available and concluded I could manage without Wes. Probably for the best, I'd hate to have to root for Tom Brady.

20 Green Bay (GB - DEF) $5 - Defenses for more than a dollar? Questionable.

21 Pittsburgh (Pit - DEF) $5

22 DeAngelo Williams (Car - RB) $15 - A low-rent running back option, a guy who splits time and has gotten hurt. No thanks.

23 Brandon Marshall (Mia - WR) $21 - I had Marshall a couple years ago. At the time he could've carried my team for weeks as a time with a ton of catches and big plays. I tried to get in for him, but the fact that he's a little crazy made me think twice.

24 Matt Ryan (Atl - QB) $13 - Overrated, perpetually.

25 Felix Jones (Dal - RB) $23 - Cowboy. Sorry.

26 Mark Ingram (NO - RB) $14 - As someone who tried out Reggie Bush, and looked at Pierre Thomas and Darren Sproles, I can't in good conscious support a New Orleans running back. I feel like Sean Payton just lives to screw over fantasy players across the country.

27 Greg Jennings (GB - WR) $35 - I actually had Jennings last year, and he was fantastic. My price to keep him this year would've actually been $34. I tried to buy him back for less, but I don't think he's going to repeat his performance given that Jermichael Finley is back and healthy. Again, a pass.

28 Ryan Grant (GB - RB) $14 - Was injured pretty bad, pass.

29 Neil Rackers (Hou - K) $2

30 Jermichael Finley (GB - TE) $24 - I think he might have a fantastic year, but I decided money would be better spent elsewhere. Man, I really hope my TE selections pay off.

31 Kenny Britt (Ten - WR) $13 - This guy got arrested three times this off-season. We run a clean ball club here...well, except for Vick obviously

32 Matt Schaub (Hou - QB) $13 - This is one of my bigger regrets of the draft. I thought Schaub would be a great pick as a back-up, and someone I could spend a little more on. I was bidding him up, and just didn't keep going. I kind of wish I had.

33 Jahvid Best (Det - RB) $23 - Maybe another one of my regrets. I think Best has sick talent, and he catches a ton of passes. I was tempted a lot (obviously, enough to buy the guy). But this guy wakes up on the wrong side of the bed and gets dinged up. He stays healthy, this might be my best pick of the year. He doesn't? It's 23 flushed away.

34 Mario Manningham (NYG - WR) $22 - I think he'll have a great year. Wanted him pretty badly, but at the time I thought there were still a couple other guys I could grab for less. In hindsight, I think he'll have a better year than the guys I ended up with.

35 Mike Tolbert (SD - RB) $13 36 Ryan Mathews (SD - RB) $13 - Two San Diego running backs, both splitting time, which I really hate a lot. I have enough frustration in my life with this stuff.

37 Julio Jones (Atl - WR) $12 - Didn't want to trust a rookie WR.

38 Knowshon Moreno (Den - RB) $14 - Moderate risk, potentially high reward. I had him last year off waivers and still like him a lot. You guessed it, he catches passes. My hesitation with him was twofold, one was Tim Tebow, who I didn't think would throw to him a lot. Two was his injury history. But Tebow, despite his direct line to Jesus, isn't starting for the Broncos. Kyle Orton is, and Orton will throw him the ball. Not a bad chance for my fourth running back in my view.

39 Anquan Boldin (Bal - WR) $15

40 Vernon Davis (SF - TE) $18

41 Marques Colston (NO - WR) $12

42 Philadelphia (Phi - DEF) $5 - They should get a bunch more sacks this year, but again, not $5 for a defense

43 Jeremy Maclin (Phi - WR) $18 - Maclin was a flat out great fantasy player last year (and a great real player, and from all reports, a great person). Had a lymphoma scare in the off-season and lost 15 pounds. I don't know about you, but to me that always screams BUY. I didn't buy him for the first couple weeks, but if he can regain form by mid-season, that'll help me out for the playoffs.

44 Eli Manning (NYG - QB) $8 - Another good backup option, I thought long and hard about him but didn't think he was as good as Schaub. I also saw Stafford, Bradford, and Freeman available, and while I need a decent backup QB, I thought one of those guys could be fine.

45 Tim Hightower (Was - RB) $22 - One of my favorite sleeper picks. I really wanted to be able to buy him, I just had four running backs already.

46 BenJarvus Green-Ellis (NE - RB) $12

47 Stevie Johnson (Buf - WR) $17 - Someone has to be good on Buffalo right? And Ryan Fitzpatrick as a QB is underrated. Now we're really going to get brief...even though this is the area of the draft where you make real winners (Because anyone you get here, you'll be able to keep easily for next year).

48 C.J. Spiller (Buf - RB) $5

49 Joseph Addai (Ind - RB) $10 - I drafted this guy in the first round maybe 4 years ago, and like him a lot this year, but it's funny how quickly you plummet as a RB in the NFL

50 Owen Daniels (Hou - TE) $10

51 Sidney Rice (Sea - WR) $6 - Tavaris Jackson? Ha!

52 Santonio Holmes (NYJ - WR) $22 - He was the last big WR I would've targeted, but thought Maclin and Johnson were better than him by himself

53 Chris Cooley (Was - TE) $3 - I was the guy who bid $2. But I don't love the Washington QB situation

54 Beanie Wells (Ari - RB) $13 - No way.

55 Chad Ochocinco (NE - WR) $9 - My wife's favorite player, but that wasn't enough for me.

56 Santana Moss (Was - WR) $16

57 New York (NYJ - DEF) $6

58 Kellen Winslow (TB - TE) $6

59 Mason Crosby (GB - K) $2

60 Stephen Gostkowski (NE - K) $3

61 Danny Amendola (StL - WR) $5 - The world loves a white wide receiver! I should've bought this guy. For $5, man, that was dumb. I was just worried about other new WRs taking his catches

62 Reggie Bush (Mia - RB) $8

63 Chicago (Chi - DEF) $1

64 Plaxico Burress (NYJ - WR) $8

65 Cedric Benson (Cin - RB) $10

66 Michael Bush (Oak - RB) $6

67 Baltimore (Bal - DEF) $2

68 Mike Thomas (Jac - WR) $5

69 Sam Bradford (StL - QB) $7 - The start of my backup backup QB list. I would've liked to get him, but I think I was saving money for a TE. Not sure exactly why. Bradford should have a good year.

70 Jimmy Graham (NO - TE) $3

71 Marshawn Lynch (Sea - RB) $11

72 Matthew Stafford (Det - QB) $9 - The second of the three QBs. I was in the bidding but dropped when I remembered that he pretty much always gets hurt. I decided to throw my lot in with Josh Freeman (this may be a dumb choice)

73 Sebastian Janikowski (Oak - K) $1

74 New York (NYG - DEF) $3

75 Matt Bryant (Atl - K) $1

76 Fred Jackson (Buf - RB) $5

77 New Orleans (NO - DEF) $1

78 Joe Flacco (Bal - QB) $4

79 Josh Brown (StL - K) $1

80 Rob Bironas (Ten - K) $1

81 San Diego (SD - DEF) $1

82 Brandon Jacobs (NYG - RB) $8

83 Jay Cutler (Chi - QB) $4 - Wow, why didn't I buy Jay Cutler? $4, that was pretty cheap. I think I remember him getting the benefit of lots of dropped interceptions, so maybe that's what was going on.

84 Mark Sanchez (NYJ - QB) $1

85 Detroit (Det - DEF) $1

86 Ben Tate (Hou - RB) $4 - Oh, if Arian Foster gets hurt, this will be a really smart pick. I bid on the guy, but wanted to make sure I could still afford Josh Freeman.

87 Jonathan Stewart (Car - RB) $5

88 Braylon Edwards (SF - WR) $3

89 Davone Bess (Mia - WR) $5

90 Mike Sims-Walker (StL - WR) $4

91 Lance Moore (NO - WR) $3

92 James Starks (GB - RB) $1

93 Malcom Floyd (SD - WR) $1

94 Tony Gonzalez (Atl - TE) $3 - I almost bought Tony G, and was debating bidding an extra dollar, but couldn't rationalize the fact that his projections are so much worse than other top guys

95 Zach Miller (Sea - TE) $3 - So I spent the same amount on a guy who'll be catching his passes from Tavaris Jackson? But this guy simply owned when he was with the Raiders a couple years ago, and got hurt a bunch last year. A bounce back would be big from him.

96 Kevin Kolb (Ari - QB) $3

97 Daniel Thomas (Mia - RB) $12

98 Thomas Jones (KC - RB) $3

99 Josh Freeman (TB - QB) $10 - Here's where I blew the rest of my cash. At this point I was basically backed into a corner. I needed a decent second QB, and while he won't have as good a year as he had last year (more INTs, definitely), he was the last guy before Donovan McNabb that I'd take.

100 Nate Burleson (Det - WR) $2

101 A.J. Green (Cin - WR) $6

102 Lee Evans (Bal - WR) $3

103 Marcedes Lewis (Jac - TE) $3

104 Darren Sproles (NO - RB) $4

105 Alex Henery (Phi - K) $3

106 Pierre Garcon (Ind - WR) $3

107 Steve Smith (Car - WR) $2

108 Kyle Orton (Den - QB) $2

109 Pierre Thomas (NO - RB) $7

110 Antonio Brown (Pit - WR) $5 - Saw him in a pre-season game and he tore it up, so what the heck. He's also good Mike Wallace insurance.

111 Atlanta (Atl - DEF) $9

112 Ronnie Brown (Phi - RB) $1

113 Garrett Hartley (NO - K) $1

114 Jordy Nelson (GB - WR) $3 - I had nominated this guy, and had really kind of wanted him, but I didn't have enough money to outbid the last guy with a lot more cash than me. The same thing happened with Crabtree a couple picks down

115 Matt Cassel (KC - QB) $1

116 Jacoby Ford (Oak - WR) $1

117 Michael Crabtree (SF - WR) $3 - Bid $2, wasn't enough.

118 Jacob Tamme (Ind - TE) $1

119 Emmanuel Sanders (Pit - WR) $1

120 Brandon Pettigrew (Det - TE) $2 So I spent it here, I couldn't figure out what other wideouts to nominate, so I figured even though I normally hate having two TEs, if the Lions do turn into the 1999 Rams, he'll be a good guy to have.

121 Montario Hardesty (Cle - RB) $1

122 LaDainian Tomlinson (NYJ - RB) $1 - Wow, not too long ago a consensus #1 overall pick. Yikes.

123 Robert Meachem (NO - WR) $1

So that was it in a nutshell. I think my team should be pretty good, but I have a lot of health concerns. Vick, Best, Miller, Maclin. That's probably a lot of risk, but I do have faith that if healthy, it should be a decent year.

New Security Program from American Airlines

2011-08-23T20:17:00.000-07:00

I got a couple of suspicious emails recently. Most of the time my suspicious emails are ridiculously poorly worded spam-shots trying to sell me Viagra (we're sadly long past the time of emails from descendents of African royalty hoping to get access to their rightful fortunes, that was a simpler time), but the emails I got were completely different.

These were from American Airlines, and while that didn't make them suspicious, what did was the vague terms with which they presented their offer. An excerpt:

Due to your status in the AAdvantage® program, you may be eligible to participate in a screening pilot program being tested by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) this fall. The goal of this pilot program is to evaluate expedited screening processes for selected American Airlines travelers through designated security checkpoints at the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) and the Miami International Airport (MIA).

Some important things to note about participating in the screening pilot program:
- You must be a United States citizen
- There is no charge
- Your eligibility and participation will not necessarily ensure an expedited screening for every flight
- When you opt-in, you give American Airlines permission to share your AAdvantage status and passenger reservation information with the TSA's Secure Flight system
- At time of opt-in, although not required, you will also have the option to share information about your enrollment in U.S. Customs and Border Protection Trusted Traveler Programs such as Global Entry, NEXUS and SENTRI

Now, there aren't too many things that annoy me more than the current TSA security procedures. I realize it's the comedy equivalent of the squirting boutonniere, so I won't get into too much detail, but the elaborate-ness of the kabuki dance to pretend like it's making us all safer is exactly what makes it annoying.

The belts, and the shoes, and the separate bins for laptops, and the random checks for explosives, and taking the liquid bag out of your carry-on (secret tip: No one in the TSA cares if you leave it in the bag. I haven't taken mine out in years)

It's all a nice idea, until you realize that trying to prevent creative terrorists by implementing measures for things they've already done doesn't stop them from implementing NEW things. But I'm done with caring about the actual effectiveness of airport security, at this point, I really only care about my time and convenience. So American Airlines, consider me intrigued at the prospect of an expedited security process.

I was intrigued enough that I opted into the program, and hope to get the chance to see it when I fly American to Dallas Fort Worth in about a month. Now, unfortunately, the letter was sparse in detail. Expedited means it could be faster, but it doesn't say anything about it being less awkward, invasive, or uncomfortable. Maybe it's a set of probes, just a really fast moving set of probes. We'll have to wait and see about that. But honestly, the freaking backscatter machines already create naked pictures of me every week, so really, how much worse could it be?

What's in a Name

2011-08-22T20:43:00.000-07:00

I'm sure back around the turn of the century, Mildred was a pretty cool name. It's not now (apologies to all the great-grandma's out there), but it happens over time, some names grow in popularity, and others decline.

If you were a pair of hipster parents in 1912, living on the edge with things like bathing suits that exposed your ankles, then if you had a little hipster daughter, you very well might have named her Mildred (It was the 6th most popular girls name that year, which today would be the equivalent of Emily). But that we look at Mildred as a stereotypical 'old' name, and that it once was hugely popular, makes you wonder about own own contemporary naming conventions.

In 100 years, it might be the case that the only Aiden you know is the old guy who always hangs out in the allergists office, or Emma is the kindly old librarian, or the only Sophia is the weird scary lady with a couple dozen cats who buys nothing but cat food to the point where you just kind of assume she's also eating the cat food, but you don't want to ask her about it because it seems impolite to imply that she likes Fancy Feast, but you're really pretty sure she's eating it herself. OK I'll admit that was a little far-fetched.

We all know there won't be libraries in 100 years.

But that's what happens to all these names, they ebb and flow. Except for names that fall victim to what we could call 'external shocks of uncoolness' You could also call it the Adolf factor. Most names probably come and go naturally, unless it happens to be the name of one of society's arch supervillains. It's weird, and probably a little unfortunate, that events completely out of your control could besmirch your name to the point that your mere introduction instantly reminds people of tragedy. And of course, it's not limited to mass murderers.

For anyone named Katrina, it stinks that when meeting for the first time, lots of people will immediately think back to flood waters, Superdome refugees, and the first time they ever got an inkling Kanye West was completely insane, but that's now the way it is. And the popularity of the name reflects that.

Below is the SSA ranking of the name Katrina for U.S. baby girls by year, starting in 2004 (year pre-Hurricane Katrina). A name ranked #1 would be most popular, a name ranked #12,301 would be something like Zorak or GoldenPalace.com

2004: 281
2005: 246
2006: 379
2007: 598
2008: 716
2009: 813
2010: 867

Pretty strong trend there. Although it's interesting that the biggest dip wasn't immediately after the hurricane in 2006 and 2007. Maybe a ton of expecting mothers had already ordered monogrammed bedsheets???

From this, it seems pretty clear. If you want to ruin someone's name, you have two options:

1 - You can help raise a murderous dictator who shares that name (somewhat impractical and probably morally questionable),

2 - Pay off the people who name hurricanes (which for some reason are the only disasters important enough to get their own names, which would tick me off if I were an earthquake, volcano, or gang of rabid attack squirrels) I feel like #2 is relatively reasonable.

The people who name the storms, they can be gotten to right? They're just meteorologists. If I were an eccentric billionaire (ok, if I were a billionaire), I might buy the naming rights to Hurricanes in perpetuity. If you can buy the rights to put a name on a stadium, I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to buy naming rights to a weather system. Plus, the government is in enough financial trouble as it is, so why should they turn down any revenue opportunity???

Then you have your very own Sword of Damocles. No one would mess with you if you could make their name synonymous with death and destruction (unless they were going for that sort of thing, in which case you should name a double rainbow after them) I'd probably just end up naming them after companies with terrible customer service. Although after the twelfth Hurricane Comcast, I'd probably have to think of some new ones.

Stupid WSJ Editorial

2011-08-19T18:14:00.000-07:00

I was reading the Wall Street Journal editorials this morning, and thought an article was particularly interesting.That's not unusual, the WSJ op-ed page is always, if nothing else, an interesting read. It usually reads like something you'd expect from some secret Fox News/GOP cabal, echoing the talking points of Republican leadership and falling over itself trying to be as "pro-business" as possible.So, let's not pretend like I'm a completely unbiased reader. But, with that said, I like to think I give almost all the articles a chance to persuade me (except for Karl Rove's, I mean, really?)But this morning there was an article from Stephen Moore that struck me as particularly callous and ridiculous. The particular passage I found distasteful came in the first section, where Moore disputes the 'nonsensical' notion that unemployment benefits will lead to more consumption and therefore, indirectly, more jobs (emphasis mine).Mr. Carney explained that unemployment insurance "is one of the most direct ways to infuse money into the economy because people who are unemployed and obviously aren't earning a paycheck are going to spend the money that they get . . . and that creates growth and income for businesses that then lead them to making decisions about jobs—more hiring."That's a perfect Keynesian answer, and also perfectly nonsensical. What the White House is telling us is that the more unemployed people we can pay for not working, the more people will work. Only someone with a Ph.D. in economics from an elite university would believe this.I have two teenage sons. One worked all summer and the other sat on his duff. To stimulate the economy, the White House wants to take more money from the son who works and give it to the one who doesn't work. I can say with 100% certainty as a parent that in the Moore household this will lead to less work. Now, I understand if you want to argue on the idea that increasing unemployment benefits doesn't immediately boost consumption (but I'm pretty sure you'll be wrong), and I also get the point that you might not agree with the idea that additional consumption spurred by those benefits will result in more hiring (though again, I would disagree), but to use your own teenage kids as demonstrative of why unemployment benefits are ridiculous seems a tad absurd.I agree with Mr. Moore that his upper-middle class teenager would take free money and continue not to work. My guess is he'll continue to get fed and have a place to live and play Xbox long after that free ride ended. But to compare the plight of the unemployed to a kid on summer vacation and say, 'See! People who get free money will just sit around and live like Kings among men!'. Well, as I said, seems a bit callous.It also doesn't seem like it would be true.

The chart below is from a study which evaluates the time people spend looking for jobs relative to the duration of their unemployment benefits.If Moore is correct, people would spend no time looking for work until benefits run out (because it's free money!).But that doesn't seem to be the case, except maybe for Moore's punk kid.

My Experience with a Virgin

2011-08-15T20:30:00.000-07:00

Probably an inappropriate headline, but how else could I attract attention to a blog post about a trip I took on an airplane? This may be my best click-bait since I was back at Penn State's The Daily Collegian and specifically took a page 7 story and linked it on our home page because the headline read 'Local Man Attempts Sex With Horse' . (One of the most read articles that year BTW)

More recently, and in no way connected with man-horse intercourse, I got the chance to fly Virgin America for the first time. (And when I say got the chance, I mean paid for a plane ticket and went to the airport)

Virgin America is another company started up by Sir Richard Branson, who pretty much established the caricature of an over-the-top billionaire (unless you count Standard Oil's Rockefeller dropping silver dollars from a blimp, which may have only existed in a Simpsons episode, but that's how I get my history)

Virgin, in a nice change of pace, is an actual low-cost airline. I think a ticket for me to go out to LAX from Chicago was $200-$250, which seemed extremely reasonable and a welcome reprieve from Southwest (They may act all happy and sweet and chirp about not charging you baggage fees, but their ticket rates stink just like everybody elses). It's also worth noting that American and United feeds from ORD to LAX have since dropped dramatically. Yay mircoecon class principles at work.

Anyway, beyond the cheaper fare, I was also excited to try out Virgin's new planes, complete with a bunch of bells and whistles that most airlines don't have yet.

It may seem weird to get excited over a new plane, but considering I'm flying at least twice a week, it doesn't seem so strange right? Exacerbated by the fact that I've been flying to and from Arkansas on a regional plane that may have been re-purposed since its first tour in Vietnam. I'm going from mysterious shrapnel to leather seats and personal entertainment units, wouldn't you be excited???

We had a mid-morning flight out of Chicago (FYI, that's consultant's mid-morning flight, which means 8:45), and a short 4 or 5 hours later, we touched down in Los Angeles. Details below:

- First ever plane I've been on to have mood lighting. I've never seen purple light on a plane, but the Virgin cabins seemed awash in it. Like a trendy club, but filled with families and other travelers.

- Personal Entertainment Units: Major points to Virgin on this, the centerpiece of their offering (at least to someone like me). A small touchscreen panel just over the tray table lets you control a wide array of entertainment options. If a touchscreen gets too much work, there's also a little tethered remote that's stored in the armrest. Definitely slick.

- Bonus Personal Entertainment Unit Fact: You can actually use them to watch TV as soon as you sit down on the plane. Such a relief for those of us who hate talking to neighbors (or spouses). I've always maintained that the longest distance on any airplane flight is between 0 and 10,000 feet when they release passengers to their electronic devices. The only way I can cope is by bringing along a WSJ from the hotel (or if forced, USA Today) and hoping it gets me all the way up. But on Virgin, I can just plug in and start watching TV, just like I could at home! (but no bonus points for enabling me to change into sweatpants, maybe someday Sir Richard)

- Alternative Entertainment Options: The previous sections imply that TV is what you can use the in-flight unit for. However, there are several other entertainment choices available.

On-Demand movies, which looked like a good set of selections, until the price tag of $8 was factored in. I don't remember exactly what movies they were, only that I wouldn't pay $8 for them, and I'm a guy who paid $12 to see Thor

On-Demand TV episodes, which extended from premium content (e.g., Curb episodes for a fee), to less than premium content (e.g., all the NCIS LA episodes you can watch!)

On-Demand Music, which is in my view the most underrated thing they have going. Virgin has a stable of radio stations to choose from, none of which were that exciting. However, they also let you build your own playlist from a whole bunch of options. I had to do work on the flight, and was able to put together a nice set of background music that wouldn't distract me too much. The interface isn't the smoothest to use, but it was great for someone like me, a veteran of the Napster era who still has a hard time paying for music (but won't steal it either)

- Cool Food Ordering System: You also control ordering of food or drink through the magical little screen. I had to order a snack box just to test it out. The credit card swiper didn't seem to be working that well, or I paid $246 for some Famous Amos cookies and a cup of Mott's applesauce (so maybe the kid's food looked better than the adult's, what of it?) It was also nice to be able to order beverages whenever you want and get pretty prompt service (although I doubt they'd be as chipper if I tested out ordering three dozen Frescas)

- Also Cool, But Slightly Creepy, Social Functions: You might think the personal screen would turn everyone into a completely anti-social weirdo (for those who weren't already). Perhaps in an attempt to avert such consequences, Virgin has added a chat function into the entertainment center. What does that mean exactly? It means you can touch a few buttons, pick another seat on the airplane (or other seats if you're into the group thing), and send them a chat invite. Cool idea in theory, but I see definite potential for a high creepiness quotient. In hindsight, I should've messaged the entire plane like it was an AOL chat room. A/S/L?...29/M/7C. I did message my wife, who was right next to me. I think she thought I was being creepy.

- Lastly, I have to commend Virgin on its crack squad of flight attendants. Above all else, they are cool and collected in the face of a crisis. And I say that with no trace of sarcasm whatsoever. Absolutely none.

OK, so they were the opposite of that, but let me explain the story.

We're cruising comfortably somewhere over flyover country, when out of nowhere one of the flight attendants flies by us in a full sprint to the front of the plane. She grabs the other attendant and quietly talks in a panicky looking manner. After a few seconds, she bolts back as fast as possible to the back of the plane. I looked over to my wife, who was watching the Kardashians on E!, so she was completely oblivious. Just when I start to tell her what happened, the attendant flies by again, like the Usain Bolt of flight attendants, and then almost like this was some kind of elaborate cricket match, reverses course and goes back, again at top speed.

On the list of things that might freak the heck out of the passengers, this wasn't number one, but it's not too far off from deploying the oxygen masks.

Finally, on her third lap of the plane, one of the passengers volunteered that he was a doctor and was there someone hurt.

At that point I think she realized no one knew what was going on, and she explained that the toilet in the bathroom was flooding.

Ah. Definitely a huge emergency for row 26, but definitely NOT an emergency for row 7. Certainly not something that warranted a huge sprint-inducing freakout. It didn't exactly give me the most confidence that in the event of a water landing this lady would be able to help us as opposed to passing out right in the middle of the emergency exit and sending us all to Davy Jones' Locker.

So that was a bit weird, but I got to watch Law & Order, so in my book, it's still a good trade-off. I'll fly Virgin anytime.

Go HBO Go, Go! An App Review for HBO Go

2011-08-09T20:38:00.000-07:00

Broadcasting and Cable ran a good summary article yesterday covering what apps are out there in the market to help all of us watch television. The ability to watch television via our mobile phones is a big deal, because we have such little exposure to television everywhere else in our lives.

I'm usually pretty diligent about trying to get access to TV on my phone, mainly because of all the travel and the fact that I'm usually separated from my DVR

Before anyone suggests it, yes, I know about Slingbox. But to quickly explain why that won't work...we don't have internet access in our apartment because our building has free wi-fi, however, that free wi-fi isn't fast enough or has the right configuration to enable video streaming through it. It's why my poor Roku box sits unused next to the DVR (Although I highly recommend the Roku for anyone who actually does have their own internet connection, it's pretty sweet)

But the goal remains to get as much TV onto my phone as humanly possible, and there are a number of apps out there that B&C explain in detail. Like for instance, did you have any idea that America's Funniest Home Videos was even still making new episodes??? They apparently have their own app! Crotch shots for everybody! Although in the article the creator of AFHV tries to take credit for the development of social media, which seems a bit much.

I also didn't know that ESPN has its own app that lets you watch one of four different ESPN on your phone. Finally a cure for the broken screens on hotel treadmills. But unfortunately, the Watch ESPN is only a mirage for those of us linked to the wrong cable companies (which is to say, the vast majority of cable companies). You basically have to have Time Warner or Verizon for TV, and although I'm sure they'll get to more networks, the fact that ~~Kabletown~~ Comcast owns NBC and ESPN is under the ABC/Disney umbrella should pretty much ensure I'll never get it on my phone until I get a new cable provider. Sigh.

However, I did just download the HBO Go app, and it's everything I could've dreamed of.

Access to what looks like every HBO show, any season, any episode, with pretty darn good quality even over standard data connections.

I watched the first episode of this season's Curb Your Enthusiasm on an elliptical machine, I queued up a couple of Season One Flight of the Conchords episodes from Arkansas, and they have the complete Wire series in case I really want to dive back into the depressing story of a decaying Baltimore.

Now, like ESPN, you have to belong to one of their chosen cable partners (which is a much longer list than ESPN's). You also have to subscribe to HBO (which I recently won back in our household's biannual threat of cable cancellation to improve our deal)

But, I can imagine a world off in the future where you can pay to subscribe to HBO's app without needing a connection through a designated cable partner. Payment straight to the content creator doesn't seem all that unrealistic when you think about how the app ecosystem has evolved (someday our TV interfaces could very well look like our phones, with apps as channels, it's one of the things I like about the Roku).

What's stopping HBO from doing that today with their app and charging anyone who doesn't currently subscribe? Probably a few things:

Proof of concept - They need to test it out and ensure people will actually watch HBO on their phones apart from nomadic loners
Erosion of physical media sales - Maybe a small factor, hard to say if they're still selling lots of DVD Box Sets. Those margins would be pretty huge, but if you've been in a Best Buy recently (my first question would be, why?) take a stroll through the physical media section. Ghost town. Besides, the mobile app doesn't allow you to watch on a computer/TV, so it isn't exactly a substitute for the DVD experience.
Erosion of paying subscribers - I'm not sure how scared I'd be about this...see above. This app isn't a substitute (yet) for TV, and most of the stuff I've seen makes it sound like there aren't tons of people excited about cable cord cutting besides me.
Ticking off cable partners - It certainly would make a few people in the Cable industry throw up a little bit, as it would basically cut them out of the loop from taking on another $10 to cable bills. But as I think about it, what recourse would those guys even have? I don't think that stripping their channel is a practical solution, but what you might be able to do is take any of your channels and rip them off of Time Warner (HBO's owner). Comcast has a bunch of channels people would miss (Bravo, MSNBC, Oxygen, and for like four people out there, Versus). But off the top of my head, I can't think of another company with such an integrated presence that could present a retaliatory threat.

So I don't think there are a ton of roadblocks, although I feel like I need to think more about retribution. The whole thing is also also based on the assumption that HBO can keep cranking out shows people will pay a premium to see (even if they all seem to run for like five episodes every two years). If HBO wasn't confident in its ability to consistently crank out the good stuff, then it would be a non-starter to even consider it.

But just download the app and look at the lineup. It's a freaking gold mine in there.

Future of Baseball

2011-08-08T21:05:00.000-07:00

I came across two articles recently that got me thinking about the future of baseball. Not the future of this season, which will hopefully end with a Phillies championship, but the long-term sustainability of the game itself.

The first article I read specifically focused on the decline in major league attendance and how it's becoming a major issue for some teams. Apparently ticket sales league-wide have been on the decline since 2007, and the author raises the idea that the sudden accessibility of tickets on secondary markets may be hurting the league from a financial perspective.

That idea is an interesting one, because it does seem likely that those fans who would've once bought a 6-game package now might be buying games individually on StubHub. However, it also seems clear that it would be tough to distinguish a technology-driven change in behavior from the fact that the global economy is imploding and has been getting worse progressively over the same time frame. (And after checking my retirement portfolio today, I can't see any reason to suspect it'll get better any time soon).

The other article, entitled, "Baseball has no Fighting Chance Against Football," discussed the ease with which football has thrust itself back into the public consciousness and shoved baseball aside quicker than Albert Belle shoving aside a young autograph seeker (wow, that was a dated reference. Does anyone else even know who Albert Belle was? And if they did, would they remember the fact that he was always annoyed?). Anyway, plug in your own current reference if you'd like, but football went and had a huge labor dispute, then came right back and it was like it never left.

Baseball may have been America's sport at one time, but football snuck up behind it, put it in a choke-hold, gave it an atomic wedgie, and stuffed it inside it's locker.

With it's place atop the U.S. sports world already surrendered, what can baseball do to make itself more important? Or even to keep itself culturally relevant?

Historically, baseball could always fall back on its rich traditions and records. A game that never changed the rules, the fall classic and what not. Unfortunately, baseball executives threw all that out the window the minute they started turning blind eyes to juiced-up roiders. The offensive explosion (a.k.a. PED) era completely destroyed part of the game's contextual link to its storied past. We're now at a point where none of the traditional performance numbers mean anything to anyone.

Frankly, even if that whole mess had never happened, our collective attention span has become so compromised that no one cares what happened ten days ago, let alone ten years ago, really let alone one hundred years ago. So even if Roger Maris' record was still standing, no one under 25 would care unless his ghost came back and either had a reality show or made a sex tape with Kim Kardashian.

Based on that, one could assume that I'd recommend a completely crazy liberal strategy of changing up the game to keep with our modern times. You could certainly envision such a strategy. The way I picture it would have slicked-up executives in suits and sunglasses talking about great ways to change baseball that could include ideas like laser bats, neon colors, and strobe lights.

I guess in my mind they'd be doing for baseball what others did to turn bowling into Rock 'n Roll Bowling, which is to say, make it so much less fun, more annoying, and vaguely resembling a Pink Floyd show at the planetarium.

Suffice it to say, I don't think that would be a great idea either. But I did have a couple quick thoughts on what they could do:

Force a better TV product: The NFL feels like it was designed purely for television. Baseball feels like it was designed purely for radio, which is great if it's 1924 and anyone talking about television was burned at the stake for witchcraft, but is less of a good thing today. While I didn't recommend making the rules of the game all liberal, I certainly think we can loosen the reins a tad on the gameday production. There are a lot of options here, and not all of them involve swearing and nudity.

It would be great to have more players miked up, I feel like that's completely missed in today's sports television world. I'd also try more experimentation with the commentary, because when you've got a 162 game season, you have no good reason not to kick the tires on ideas for a game or two. Two drunken fans in the booth? What could possibly go wrong? I'm pretty sure they've done it in Europe. Or maybe we change the on-screen dynamic to resonate more with today's viewing audience. Get some Twitter feeds on there, I would love to see that scrolling up the right side of the TV. You're telling me you couldn't find a staffer to curate tweets and throw the funniest lines up on screen? You could get an intern to do it for $5/hour.

Go where football can't get you: This might be the most legitimate of my crazy ideas, but baseball does have one advantage over the NFL, apart from the fact that its players won't develop mental disorders from repeated head trauma. It's the fact that people in other countries actually LIKE their sport! NFL Europe crashed and burned, and the league continues to try and push itself on the rest of the world as the global community collectively shrugs its shoulders and wonders what the hell a nickel package is. Baseball, on the other hand, actually has some presence on the rest of planet Earth. Why the league can't get its act together and bring some of that money/energy/interest into their organization is anybody's guess. I'm sure that part of it is that many places where the game is popular don't have completely developed economies (e.g., Cuba, Panama), but at the rate the U.S. is going, we might be at parity soon enough, so it wouldn't hurt to have a plan to reach out to those guys.

Introduce relegation: Another idea from Europe, this would be absolutely dynamite, but is in no way feasible due to the economic interests of owners. Take your AAA and AA leagues and make them the second and third divisions of MLB. Then at the end of every season, the worst team from the majors has to switch leagues with the best team in AAA.

You'd have to reconfigure the entire minor league system, and basically make it like soccer. Teams would've have affiliates, and it would become a much more free market system for talent because each team would be looking out for themselves. You could argue it would hurt the development of younger players because minor leagues would emphasize wins over building major league talent, but hell, it would be exciting, and I'm sure fans of the cellar dwellers would pay some attention

I had a bunch of other ideas, but it's already late, and I told my wife I'd call her ten minutes ago. It's too bad, I really wanted to come back to that laser bats idea.

New iPhone Game = New Obsession

2011-08-07T19:25:00.000-07:00

Whenever I'm sitting on the tarmac in Northwest Arkansas or some other place, I go through my own pre-flight check in process, before the flight attendant comes over the PA and tells us all to turn off our electronics in what's always kind of a buzzkill.

I like to quickly cycle through the apps I have to make sure any content I'd want in flight is downloaded.

Refreshing my twitter feed, downloading the newest Sporcle quizzes, and updating the Huffington Post and NY Times, all with the idea that I need as much to do (assuming I don't have to get work done)

But last week, I was reading an article on Grantland about iPad gaming, and the article mentioned a new game, 'Game Dev Story'.

As it was described in the article:

Kairosoft's Game Dev Story, which is another older title I regret not having played sooner, for it comes packed with wit and metacritique of an industry in desperate need of both. In Game Dev Story you start a game company and go about your game-developing business.

There's more in the article, but that's all I needed to see. I went to iTunes, and despite a hefty $1.99 price tag, it held enough promise that I thought it might be worth it.

So I bought it, and it led to an interesting race against the clock where I stared at the iPhone's screen, with the newly purchased icon safely tucked in the lower right hand corner, waiting for it to load while the attendant tried to get the door closed.

It was a close call, but the app finished right before we had to turn everything off.

Once we hit the right altitude and got the go-ahead, I fired up my new game, and didn't look up until we were making a final descent into O'Hare.

It was another simulation game, and I was hooked. Developing my own little fake games and managing my own little fake game developers. It was pretty addictive. I like to think I was a fair manager. I only fired one little fake coder because he was bad at his job, but I felt really bad about it.

His name was Norm, and he begged me not to fire him. But he wasn't cutting it, and even though it broke my heart, I had to send his bespectacled face out into our crappy economy. It got even worse when I placed a fake job ad for new programmers a fake year later and Norm showed up as an applicant. I know it's probably just a lack of space in the game that made him pop up again, but I couldn't help but wonder how Norm was managing for a year out there, applying for jobs with no hope of success (as I said, he was a really bad programmer).

But aside from forcing me to confront the harsh realities of management in a digitized way, it did get me wondering why the heck these games appeal to me so much.

I thought about the games I played in my youth, and the list is full of these Sim games. Below, a sampling:

SimCity - Of course, who didn't play SimCity. The SNES version got me started on what might have been a great career in urban planning, although I was always obsessed with having no roads. We only had trains in my town, because even as a kid I hated traffic. SimCity let me build my utopia, like a Chicago with nothing but El Stops. Ew.

SimTower - This one was like SimCity, but in a building! You got to build restaurants, offices, condos, and a bunch of other stuff. You could also pick out individual people in the tower and name them. There was a little version of me in my tower, but I think he got ticked off and closed his office when I had trouble managing elevator capacity. What was amazing was that he did it seemingly out of spite. What can I say? He took after his father.

SimLife - If the religious right ever picked a Sim game to protest, it would probably be this one (at least until SimAbortion gets released). The game let you create your own species of animal, combining different parts of other animals. Yeah, not the best game if you think we were all put on this planet by a divine creator, but it was the best game if you wanted to cross-breed giraffes and alligators. You couldn't hide in the trees from those suckers.

SimFarm - Yes, this was actually a game. You got to run a farm. But you couldn't even hire illegal migrant workers, so how accurate could it have been?

The Sims - This didn't come out until I was in college, but at some point I did play it and kind of got into managing my little Sim. I made him get up early and work out, then go to work, then eat, and then pray a girl would walk by for him to talk to. Didn't realize it'd be a preview of real life at the time.

Roller Coaster Tycoon - Two things made this game, where you run your own theme park, hilarious. The first was that you could make all your guests sick to the point they vomited. The second was that if you were really good, you could design a roller coaster that would crash and kill guests.

Baseball Mogul/Eastside Hockey Manager - These two games were, simply put, the best sports games NOT named Super Tecmo Bowl. They were a baseball and hockey simulator, respectively, and I must have played them for about a billion hours. Baseball Mogul let you run a baseball team, and I got pretty obsessed with running a profitable team and winning every World Series. The Phillies won a ton of games under my leadership, which for a kid growing up in Philadelphia, seemed like pure fantasy at the time.

Eastside Hockey Manager was a rough equivalent, but for the NHL. The game was amazingly detailed, and built solely by some guy in Europe who must've been some kind of genius. Again, many Philadelphia titles. Those years were great for the fake fans of digital Philadelphia, although I bet they still had to contend with digital traffic on I-76 and digital flash mobs.

But I have a hard time figuring out exactly what got me into those games so much. You sit and manage your team, your theme park, your farm, whatever, and try to make it awesome. Was I always just an MBA pretending to be a kid and implementing sound operational processes? (The exception would be the designing roller coasters to kill people. That is no longer part of my repertoire)

I guess maybe they appeal to me because they're puzzles, and I like figuring things out. So for at least the next few weeks, I'll probably be obsessed with developing new games in Game Dev Story, and making a ton of fake money for my fake studio. Maybe even enough to hire that fake Norm guy back and stop feeling bad.

Thoughts on ESPN's New Qb Rating QBR

2011-08-05T16:45:00.000-07:00

The whole Chinese calendar thing never really made sense to me. I think I was born in the year of the rooster, or maybe the year of the rat? ESPN apparently has no love for it either, they've recently proclaimed 2011 as...

THE YEAR OF THE QUARTERBACK!

As far as ESPN promotional campaigns go, this one is relatively innocuous. Whether it's the year of the quarterback for any kind of clear reason would be debatable, but at least it isn't the absolute travesty that was the absurd 'Who's More Now?' campaign.

Anyway, ESPN has opened the Year of the Quarterback (which was almost called the Year of Boring CBA Negotiations), with the debut of a new statistic, conceived to take the current QB rating and advance it.

They're calling it QBR, which somehow is short for Total Quarterback Rating. I guess it's technically TQBR, or Total QBR. I guess that part needs work.

But ESPN is trying to give us a better QB Rating, and it's hard to argue with their logic. The current standard for QB Rating is a relatively straightforward formula, but no one remembers it offhand or can easily calculate it. It also can yield a perfect score of 158.3, which doesn't have the same ring to it as a perfect 10, or even bowling a 300.

So they want to replace it. Cool.

From their description, it seems like ESPN is trying to keep pace in the stats arms race, the one that gave us the MIT Sloan Sports Conference, Moneyball, and dozens and dozens of eager young quant jocks trying to break into the business.

Again, makes sense to me. Anything that gets more analysis into the public consciousness is fine. Then maybe we'd get some more insights from our broadcast announcers.

But I wonder to what extent this new Total QBR is going to seep into the public. Most specifically, I wonder about this because I can't seem to find any details on how the formula itself is even calculated.

It spits out a number for each QB between 0 and 100, that's a good idea.

And a review of it's results over the last three seasons pass the initial smell test.

Peyton Manning has the top two slots with his 2009 and 2008 seasons, the middle rankings have QBs like Matt Cassel and David Garrard, and Jamarcus Russell comes in dead last.

And I also get the logic behind including the win probability via expected points per play. That's a reasonable approach to me, based on my understanding of what they've done.

But the inclusion of 'Dividing Credit' and a 'Clutch Index,' give me some pause.

In terms of 'Dividing Credit', this is what they say about the formula:

On a pass play, for instance, there are a few basic components:
• The pass protection
• The throw
• The catch
• The run after the catch

In the first segment, the blockers and the quarterback have responsibility for keeping the play alive, and the receivers have to get open for a QB to avoid a sack or having to throw the ball away. On the throw itself, a quarterback has to throw an accurate ball to the intended receiver. Certain receivers might run better or worse routes, so the ability of a QB to be on target also relates somewhat to the receivers. For the catch, it might be a very easy one where the QB laid it in right in stride and no defenders were there to distract the receiver. Or it could be that the QB threaded a needle and defenders absolutely hammered the receiver as he caught the ball, making it difficult to hold on. So even the catch is about both the receiver and the QB. Finally, the run after the catch depends on whether a QB hit the receiver in stride beyond the defense and on the ability of a receiver to be elusive. Whatever credit we give to the blockers, receivers and quarterback in these situations is designed to sum to the team expected points added.

The ESPN video tracking has been useful in helping to separate credit in plays like these. We track overthrows, underthrows, dropped passes, defended passes and yards after the catch. The big part was taking this information and analyzing how much of it was related to the QB, the receivers and the blockers. Not surprisingly, pass protection is related mostly to the QB and the offensive line, but yards after the catch is more about what the receiver does. Statistical analysis was able to show this, and we divided credit based on those things.

In an earlier post where I discussed why the NFL doesn't lend itself to statistical analysis as easily as baseball, I talked a lot about the difficulty of measuring intent and assigning value to different teammates coordinating the activity.

It's clear the ESPN stat gurus have also thought about this, and apparently have developed some solution.

But they don't describe how exactly they did it, which has me quite curious, because it seems like that would be by far the greatest challenge in building this metric. Who's responsible for the success of the pass? And how would you even start to divvy that up amongst the players? Because if you could do that accurately, you'd be in a whole new world in terms of attributing the reasons for victory, which would have dramatic implications for players and their earnings potential (by this I mean, if we could suddenly say the right guard drove a significant proportion of his team's offensive success, and could somehow measure that with objective data, suddenly that guard might argue he should get paid more than the right tackle)

I'm pretty confident the guys at ESPN haven't gotten that far deep into details, but without knowing it just has me wondering how they got to where they are. Maybe they're talking about it in their TV debut tonight, but I would assume not.

That brings me to the larger question of how broadly this will be adopted.

If you want a metric to become the standard for everybody, it sure as heck helps if you tell us all how to calculate it. Even if we can't do the math ourselves, showing it removes the black box 'trust us' element from the equation.

They can integrate it into Monday Night Football all they want, but until I see a little more under the curtain (or skirt for a more adult analogy), I'm withholding judgement.

Even if I agree with it about Manning and Russell.

Random Path Crossing with Instapaper

2011-08-04T20:49:00.000-07:00

There are few things quite as disappointing as exiting the airport terminal, only to be met with a cab line half a mile long. It's like when you would go to Disney World and wait forever to get on Pirates of the Caribbean...only in this line your reward is beat up Crown Victoria cab and no catchy songs (though sometimes there may be a pirate)

And when that happens, I usually head straight for the CTA.

Tonight was one of those nights, and as I boarded the train, I navigated myself through the tourists and their luggage to the back of the train car. (And a note to said tourists, do we really need the giant bags in the aisle? When your bag gets to be the size of a person, just pay for the freaking cab)

But I get to the back of the train and there's a couple sitting in the second to last row. Behind them is a single seat, which the guy had put his bag on. I didn't even know the seat was there, as I think it's usually occupied by a crazy and/or homeless person when I'm on the train.

But the guy assumed I wanted the seat, and went and took his bag off so I could sit down. That was nice of him.

And as I sat down I saw him start playing with his iPhone. Like just about everyone between the ages of 15 and 35 does on public transportation these days.

I saw him pull up Twitter, and as I watched him scroll through his updates I wondered, who is this random guy who moves bags off chairs for a stranger?

So I looked at his handle, pulled out my own iPhone and booted up my own Twitter account. Then I looked him up.

It was the founder of Instapaper.

Wait, what??? Instapaper like the app that lets you download articles for later? An app that I downloaded? And he's also a developer behind Tumblr? (Now I actually ended up deleting Instapaper, and I use Blogger instead of Tumblr, but still)

Frankly, it seemed pretty amazing that I was randomly sitting behind this dude who had such an impact in mobile media (with 23k Twitter followers, just a shade ahead of me)

It also got me thinking about what it would be like in a few years, when geo-location on mobile devices becomes much more popular.

foursquare is really only the beginning, and while it's designed to help you let your friends know where you are and what you're doing, it's only a matter of time before we have the ability to know who everyone is wherever we are.

Through a combination of more precise locators (which are probably good enough already), facial recognition technology (which already exists), and the continued erosion of the desire for privacy (dwindling), you could imagine a world where you get on the train. But instead of everyone just fiddling on their smart phones by themselves, you can pull up a view of everyone on the train with you who has opted into the web. It might seem crazy, but at some point, people won't think anything of putting that information out there. It'll just be the way it is.

That makes me feel old, prematurely.

And I should also stop looking at other people's phones, that's not polite.

The Eagles are NOT the Miami Heat

2011-08-01T20:18:00.000-07:00

Quick post today, because I read an article that made me roll my eyes. Now granted, I'd say a good 80% of the things I read make me roll my eyes, but this one was especially roll worthy.

For those of you who don't follow football, the Eagles made what some might term a 'splash' in the free agency pool this year. Free agency is where you go out and buy new players for your team, with the idea that they'll be an improvement over your current players, some of whom you'll get rid of.

The Eagles signed the best overall player on the free agent market, a cornerback named Nnamdi Asomugha (which I spelled right on the first try here, despite giving Blogger's spell check a seizure). Asomugha is arguably the best defensive coverage player in the NFL, and was only available as a free agent because the Raiders screwed up something with his contract (I'm assuming the intern responsible was fired or had his organs harvested by Al Davis).

So the Eagles signed this guy, as well as a number of other players. In commenting to the press, one of these players, new backup quarterback Vince Young, referred to the new collection of teammates as a 'Dream Team'.

And for a sports media that loves to traffic in misconstrued off-the-cuff remarks, a stupid waste of time was born.

Because as soon as Young made his comments, they became the fuel for the sports media echo chamber, and everyone suddenly had to provide a comment or opinion (irony quotient of me saying that - high). Googling the term 'vince young dream team eagles', returned over 338,000 results.

And of course, others were asked to comment in response

Speaking to reporters at Cowboys camp, (Defensive Coordinator Rob) Ryan said that he was happy with the Cowboys’ relative lack of big-name free-agent signings because he thinks the players the Cowboys already have are good enough. And then he said he’s looking forward to playing a certain other team that has received more attention in free agency.

“These are proven players, and that’s what we need,” Ryan said. “I don’t know if we win the all-hype team, I think that might have gone to somebody else, but we’re going to beat their ass when we play them.”

Ugh. Really?

The new backup quarterback for the Eagles had one thing to say, and now all of a sudden they're a bunch of self-promoting showboaters akin to the Miami LeBrons?

Maybe people would say I'm overreacting to the comment, and that may be true. But as an Eagles fan who's had to endure years and years of abuse from other Eagles fans because their owner once referred to the organization as the 'Gold Standard,' I can see where this might go. That's despite the fact that the comment came from the backup quarterback, which is only one step removed from the third quarterback, which is only one step removed from me.

Of course, if the Eagles did manage to win the Super Bowl, I'd probably buy a Dream Team shirt

How Do You Shower?

2011-07-31T09:38:00.000-07:00

Most of you probably don't spend a lot of time thinking about yourselves in the shower.

And most of you DEFINITELY don't spend a lot of time thinking about ME in the shower.

You probably are now though, because I just brought it up. For that, I sincerely apologize.

But it's something I've been thinking about, not just being in the shower, but the actual act of showering.

It's not really that complicated, lather rinse repeat, but there's also another question, the question of how you stand in the actual shower itself.

I'm going to assume that the vast majority of us stand in the shower. I think even the laziest among us wouldn't have thought to sit down in there, or build a custom waterproof recliner or something. Such a recliner would take a bunch of work and multiple trips to the hardware store, so it seems even more unlikely after giving it more thought.

So we're a nation of shower standers, but which direction do we all face when we're in the shower?

I've asked a number of people, and everyone falls into two distinct camps. Those that get in there and face the shower head, and those that get in and face away from the shower head. The only things these two groups agree on is that...

1) Their way, either forward or backwards, is obviously the best way,
2) Nobody stands perpendicular to the shower head, that it's a ridiculous idea potentially big in neutral countries like Switzerland that are filled with wafflers (note, I said wafflers, as in people who waffle, and not actual waffles, which are far more delicious and not indigenous to Switzerland)

So there are some percentage of the population (n) that face forwards, and there's another set (1-n) that face backwards. The crazy weirdos that either face sideways or don't shower at all are excluded and assumed not to exist (although anyone who's taken the El in Chicago knows that's not true, but it's a simplifying assumption).

I've tried to find out what that n proportion is. I've tried through informal questions to people I know, which just gets mostly weird looks. I've also tried googling for the answer, which just gets weird search results including a WikiHow entry entitled 'How to Shower.'

I'm assuming the article was written for the millions of people that have completed the following...

1) Discovered their own thumbs
2) Learned to stand and walk
3) Developed a basic understanding of social conventions
4) Received a basic education
5) Obtained money through either functional responsibility or more illicit methods
6) Acquired a computer, again through either conventional purchase or more illicit methods
7) Learned to use the Internet and potentially a search engine
8) But never learned how to take a shower

But regardless, WikiHow's Guide to Taking a Shower doesn't even cover the forwards vs. backwards decision!!!

An excerpt:

3. Turn on the water to your preferred temperature. Check the position of the shower head, to be sure that the water is spraying downward rather than out of the shower. Make sure you monitor the amount of hot water you are using before it gets cold.

4. Monitor the temperature. Once you are sure that the temperature is perfect, cautiously enter your shower. Check if the temperature is comfortable before continuing.

5. Wet your entire body. Be sure that your entire head is completely wet and every inch of your body is covered in water. This is important for basic cleaning of your body.

They manage to go on for 16 total steps to taking a shower, including the task of 'Putting Clean Clothes On,' but they never mention how you're supposed to orient yourself in the shower.

How dare you WikiHow.

So there didn't seem to be any answer out there on the Internet, and if I kept searching, eventually my employer would start to ask why I spent so much of my time researching people in the shower.

So I started to think about how one's idea of the right way to shower would be informed. I guess through seeing other people. So I tried to think of where I'd seen others showering and if that influenced my personal shower style (for the record, I'm a backwards facing showerer)

I never remember seeing my parents shower when I was growing up, which I think we can all agree is for the best. I remember showering at the gym in the locker room, but unique circumstances abound and standard urinal protocols apply there as well (keep your eyes on the wall, no talking). Then I tried to think of movie examples, but those are only really excuses to show naked actresses, which I think is great, but not a reliable source of data.

Which brings me to the conclusion that no one really knows. For most of us, the shower remains our own little fortress of solitude, where we don't really maintain an open door policy, so there's no feedback loop.

No one knows if how they shower is the right way, and there doesn't seem to be any real source of authority on the subject. Is there an optimal way to shower? Is there a physical health rationale for facing one way or another? Is it influenced by personality type? Like is it correlated with Myers-Briggs? Do extroverts face the shower head while introverts face away from it? Do men and women shower differently? Do people tend to shower like their parents? (I know I didn't have any traumatic shower run-ins with my parents, but I'm sure others have. And would those people pick up the same style or switch to be contrarian?)

I feel like these are the things marketers for Body Wash should think about. But if they do know, they aren't saying. Those Old Spice jerks.

A major critique of consulting

2011-07-30T17:33:00.000-07:00

When my wife and I were on our honeymoon in Hawaii, we were enjoying a post-dinner walk in Lahaina when we walked by a tourist booth. The kind that sells tickets to all kinds of area attractions, with a small storefront, tiny counter, and rack with dozens and dozens of flyers (enough that they had multiple kinds of luaus advertised, because one kind of luau isn't enough)

Anyway, we were walking by when the guy who worked there stopped us. He was an older guy, maybe in his late 50's or 60's, and immediately my first reaction was, 'Oh great, I'm going to have to figure out how to tell this guy I have zero interest in buying tickets to any of his luaus'

But it turned out he didn't really want to sell us anything, he just seemed to want to talk to us and eventually insult my occupation.

He engaged us in conversation, and while I kept waiting for the sales pitch that never came, he told us about how he moved to Hawaii, how he sold multiple businesses he ran, and how college was stupid.

He asked my wife and I what we did, and I knew he was going to have some kind of negative reaction, because we already established that he was anti-formal education, which is a foundational pillar of the MBA-based management consulting industry.

So when it was my turn, I told him I was a management consultant.

The response was not something unexpected.

"But what do you know about running a business? Have you ever run a company?"

I get stuff like that from time to time, and I like to think I take it pretty well. I mean, I don't whip out a Power Point deck and beat them to death with it or anything. But still, it's pretty insulting when someone tells you that you really don't know anything and couldn't possibly be worth what your client pays you (which I inferred from his tone).

It reminded me of another time back in business school, when a bunch of prospective consultants went out to a recruiting dinner at a restaurant. The owner asked what our group was doing there and when we told him we were recruiting for consulting jobs, he quickly told us about how some consultant tried to sell him on some help, but how he was too smart for that. After all, who would know more about his business than him?

What I think these people fail to understand is that our business isn't based on parachuting into a company, grabbing an overwhelmed client by his/her shirt collar and telling him that we know best. It also rests on the assumption that in order to have any credibility to help someone, you have to have experience or have previously done it before.

I think that's a ridiculous idea.

One of the only things I've figured out since I've been working, is that the best way to solve a problem is often to just talk about it with as many of the smartest people you can find.

They won't always be right, and in some cases maybe they'll be completely wrong, but they'll almost always have a view that can help inform an eventual decision. And when you do run a business, even if you built it from the ground up, you'll always come across situations where a) you don't know what to do and b) you don't have the time or resources to deal with.

And when that happens, people like us are available to help. It's not that complicated.

So if the tourist booth guy was having a problem, like maybe he had too many people interested in pineapple festivals and not enough people interested in surf camp (I imagine these are the problems people have in Hawaii), he can feel free to give me a call. I might not know what to do, but I work with a bunch of really smart people, and when we put all of our heads together we usually get something good on paper.

As long as his computer has Power Point, he'll be all set.

Speeding in Arkansas

2011-07-28T19:17:00.000-07:00

It's a Thursday afternoon in the sprawl of suburban Arkansas.

To be more precise, it's late afternoon, the gloaming of the consultant's workweek, when things are hopefully winding down and you stare longingly at the laptop clock hoping it gets to that point when no one will judge you as you leave for the airport.

You could argue that staying later than everyone who actually works at the client and sending emails at all hours of the night would earn you some capital to leave on Thursdays on your own terms. But consultants are the worrying kind, and more self-conscious than most, so we're always cautious.

But that can cause some problems if you wait too long. And that's what happened today.

With a 20+ minute drive to the airport, we didn't get out the door until 4:05.

That would be fine, only the other associate on our project had a flight at 4:45.

And it wasn't a normal flight back to the office, he was leveraging a cheaper plane ticket to go home an see his family.

And he hadn't checked in...and he was going to check a bag.

And I was rocking a Chevy Malibu courtesy of Hertz.

So we started booking it as fast as possible, knowing that it was going to be really really tight.

Driving through the winding back roads through the woods and past the trailers, we were actually making pretty good time.

Until about 4:15, when I came over a hill to see a white police cruiser on the other side of the road.

Crap.

We zipped past the police cruiser and both looked in the rearview to see if he'd let us go.

At first we didn't see any reaction...but optimism was quickly dashed as his car lurched from its comfortable place in the shade.

He pulled us over a little ways down the road, and both of our hearts sank. Our hearts sank, and our temperatures rose, because it was 104 degrees at the time and we had to turn off the engine to pull over.

God, the South is freaking hot. Even hotter as you wait on the side of the road, clock ticking on your chance to get out of town, while the local police decide your fate.

Fortunately for us, the cop didn't take too long to write me up for speeding. I'm guessing he didn't want to spend any more time out in the sun than we did. I couldn't even make out how much it was for, but I grabbed it and quickly got us back on the road (I was officially written up for 52 in a 30 mph zone, just a hundred feet or so from a turn where the new speed limit would've been 55. Doh.)

I'll try and be careful with my word choice here, but let's just say I drove fairly aggressively for the remainder of the trip, pulling up to the tiny regional airport just a few minutes before the flight.

I told him to get to the counter, beg to get checked-in, and wave my speeding ticket in front of them to show them how crazy this has been.

I let him out and went to return the car. By the time I got to my gate, he was long gone on the way home.

It may have been the most productive thing I did all day.

NFL Reporters on Twitter

2011-07-27T20:46:00.000-07:00

It might seem outrageous to say so, but I think this Twitter thing has legs.

Like, this thing could actually get kinda big.

The thing that struck me throughout the day, as I continually checked for updates on the latest NFL signings (and the Eagles stubborn insistence on waiting for everyone else to move before they do anything), was how the way in which I gather and react to breaking sports news is so different from even last year.

Now, last year was a normal year in the NFL, so there wasn't as much compression of all the NFL news into one short period of time. But with that said, last year I'm sure I was sitting at a desk somewhere, every now and then hitting refresh on ProFootballTalk or Philly.com or an Eagles Message Board.

Sitting, locked into a computer, waiting for a writer or blogger to create some 'content' and blast it out for everyone to their site.

Now, I'm just yanking feverishly on my Twitter app, from my phone, with the only limit to instantaneous news releases is whether or not Adam Schefter's thumbs finally snapped off.

The information travels faster, that's certainly a given. But I don't think that's what I like best about it.

The information is also pretty diverse, in that at this point (now that John Clayton from ESPN joined), pretty much every reporter is on the darned thing. And since they all follow each other through some dizzying interconnected spiderweb, a notable piece of information is immediately re-tweeted until everyone even remotely interested is also reporting it. So every source can be a source to all. The publication you write is now far outweighed by how many followers you have and the coolness of your avatar (hint: pick something hip and ironic, but not so hip and ironic that it's actually lame, although I can rarely tell the difference)

And yet, I don't think that diverse array of sources coming together quickly and seamlessly is my favorite part either.

I think my favorite part of the whole thing is the 140.

140 characters. That's all you get. That is the sole physical limitation of a tweet. Laden or unladen. African or European.

What that means for reporters, is that there's no such thing as burying the lede. You have to say what the news is, and there is no room for any filler.

For someone who's read enough AP sports game and news recaps to write one in its exact style from memory (which is why I always had an easy time writing Sports at the PSU newspaper), it's great not to have to cull through that for the important stuff.

It's all just right there, in 140 characters.

Now, that's not to say there aren't downsides.

The emphasis on speed leads to more rumors and half-truths being thrown out there, and the democratization of information flow certainly facilitates that. A nobody can start a Twitter rumor that escalates into a full-blown 'Oh Shit Brett Favre's Coming Back Again' nightmare. Editor's Note: No sooner did I post this than I saw an article talking about exactly this scenario - Article

I'm also still not sold on Twitter's interface, because I have a terrible time deciding who to follow and who not to follow. I want to get news and funny stuff, but sometimes I'll think about adding someone and see their entire stream is just a series of conversations with other people. That just seems like a waste in the feed.

And then of course there's also the fact that it pushes us further to the point where we all just demand a constant data feed wired into our brains.

But that's something I've been advocating for years anyway.

The New NFL CBA and Revaluation of NFL Draft picks

2011-07-26T20:55:00.000-07:00

While the leaders of the free world continue to bicker back and forth about a few measly trillion dollars, the leaders of the American sports world proved a bit more capable in their negotiations over a few measly billion dollars.

The NFL players and owners recently came to terms on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement, which is great news for football fans. For a while there, it looked like we'd be forced to spend time with our wives and families on Sunday. Fortunately, we've been saved, as cooler heads prevailed, and the NFL players and owners found it in their hearts to take tons of our money and split it on agreeable terms.

From what I've read, it seems like a pretty fair deal all around. The owners get to keep more money, but the players get a firm salary floor for each team, a raised minimum salary, and even extra health benefits (which seemingly were pretty disgraceful).

But, there was one group of players that got completely jobbed. Well, they aren't exactly players yet. They're the NFL rookies, pre-rookies, pre-pre-rookies, and even some kids who are probably tearing it up at 5th grade recess right about now.

As part of the CBA, the NFL Players Association agreed to much tighter limits on how much early first round draft picks can receive in compensation for their first contracts. Reports indicate that the guys at the top could lose more than 50% of what they would've earned before the new agreement.

I agree that rookie salaries were completely out of hand, with tons of guaranteed money going to players who could develop into All-Pros but could just as easily crawl into a bottle of cough syrup never to be heard from again (Ahem, JaMarcus Russell)

But it had to have been easy for the players to give that up in the negotiations. After all, rookies aren't members of the NFLPA before they sign their first contracts. I sincerely doubt all the veterans sat around the table depressed that the high-end rookies would have to deal with $25M instead of $50.

So maybe they turned some rookies into anti-union Republicans. We'll have to see if Packers rookie Derek Sherrod starts stumping for Scott Walker (my guess would be no).

But thinking about the impact on rookies got me wondering what impact the new CBA might have on future drafts. Specifically, I started wondering if a new wage scale would increase the likelihood of trades, particularly in the beginning of the first round.

Conventional wisdom, ok, my own opinion of what conventional wisdom should be, told me that trading up for a high first round pick was always a terrible idea. NFL talent evaluators should be sure of only one thing...that they make tons of mistakes. In my view, trading multiple picks and chances to get them right for one single shot at a 'top 10' player, is like punching Jesus in the face and then seeing if he hits you with a lightning bolt (or whatever Jesus' superpowers give him, I don't know a ton about the Bible).

Those trade ups were even more risky because of the huge financial investment involved, e.g., the aforementioned Mr. Russell.

But now, these guys are so much cheaper! 50% mark downs on all top first round draft picks! Let the bargains begin!

But wait. As I thought about it, I quickly realized that idea didn't make any sense.

NFL teams place a certain value on each draft pick. They probably don't lay it all out on paper, but they probably have some idea in some combination of their heads. That value, because we don't have a better way to quantify it, would be most easily translated into money. Let's call it X.

Now let's think about it even further. If you're a team sitting at pick 27, and you want to go get pick 10, because you ignored my advice and think you're an excellent talent evaluator. Well, you've got to go call up the team at number 10 and offer them some stuff.

But you don't offer them X. Because X is actually made up of a couple different components

A - The Maximum amount of NFL goods (players and picks) you'll give up for pick #10
B - The financial cost of signing player 10 to a contract (which is fairly predictable based on draft slot)
C - The remainder, X-(A+B), which is some barely tangible estimate of future performance value

So great, in the new world of new CBAs, the cost of component B just shrunk by half. Yay for us.

Unfortunately, in this new world of new CBAs, there's also ESPN, NFL Network, and 10,000 Twitter reporters who haven't stopped talking about the new CBA (I suppose there are bloggers too, but no one reads them anymore. Blogging is so 2005.)

So all the other teams are just going to start asking for more A. Maybe even lots more A. Now, you may be able to negotiate a better deal, because they'll be more information asymmetry with component A than component B (especially if you're trading them your own players), but that also could work against you.

Anyway, that's just a theory. If we wanted to test and see if that's actually the case, we'll have to compare trades of high first round picks and see how much component A, the value of NFL goods, are required to trade for these picks. Stands to reason it would go up as the teams looking to trade down try to extract more value.

I tried to look into it by comparing the 2010 NFL draft trades to the 2011 NFL draft trades in the first round, under the rationale that in the 2011 draft NFL executives knew a new CBA was coming, and new the players would sacrifice the rookie contracts as part of the deal, so any team trading out of the top end of the first round would definitely ask for more component A.

And if the biggest trade of the draft is any indication, we may start seeing just that.

Cleveland owned pick number 6 in the first round, and Atlanta wanted to move up.

So in return, Atlanta gave Cleveland the 26th pick in the first round, pick 59 in round two, pick 124 in round four, and their first and fourth round picks in 2012.

Sounds like a lot to me (although to be technical, I think it also determines on your personal discount rate on NFL draft picks. I'm not quite sure what this should be...maybe index it to LIBOR or something)

But obviously, we'll have to wait and see how this might change future draft-day wheeling and dealing. I think it's safe to assume teams at the top will demand even more, which may lead to bigger deals, more punditry and more exaggerated preliminary conclusions on winners and losers without any kind of objective performance to measure.

And I will be there watching it all, hoping my wife doesn't yell at me to stop watching the draft because it's not even actual football.

Lessons in Feedback

2011-07-25T21:17:00.000-07:00

One of the most important assets for any consultant is the ability to give (and receive) constructive feedback. In an industry where most are expected to develop and build new skills rapidly, its critical to, well, be critical.

But today, I had an epic fail of a feedback session.

I'll let the recipient of that feedback explain:

Dear XXXXXXX:

Thank you for taking the time out of your schedule to complete our Guest Survey. I apologize that you felt our gym "sucked". Our goal is to not only meet the needs of each and every guest we serve, but to exceed your expectations to make your stay as pleasant and comfortable as possible.

We did add free weights recently, however the room does not allow for anymore equipment than what we have provided. There are 3 gyms within walking distance to our hotel where they provide a discount to our guest. If you decide to ever come visit us again, please let us know and we can provide you with one of these coupons and a free shuttle to the area gyms.

Again, I apologize for the inconveniences during your stay and hope to see you during your next visit.

If I can provide any assistance, don't hesitate to contact me directly at XXX-XXX-XXXX.

Sincerely,

XXX XXXXXXXXXX
Hyatt Place Rogers/Bentonville

I got that email today in response to a guest survey I filled out for the Hyatt Place in Arkansas.

I read the note, and immediately felt bad. It can't be fun to be the manager of a hotel and receive feedback that your place of business 'sucked'

I had written that at the end of the survey. The survey itself was a long list of questions rating several attributes of the Hyatt Place in Bentonville. It asked the respondent to rate those attributes along a series of radio buttons from 1 to 10.

(Incidentally, when I see customer surveys asking for a 1 to 10 score, I immediately assume they're going to evaluate themselves on the 'Net Promoter Score', which is a framework that Bain & Co. invented to identify the people who will actively recommend your business [Promoters who score it a 9 or a 10], versus the detractors [I believe those who score it a 1 or 2]. The rest of the people in the middle are just the squishy middlers, I think they get ignored)

Anyway, because I have that bias against surveys that ask for a 1 to 10 rating, I'm careful to only give extremely high or extremely low scores to stuff I really love or really hate.

The only thing I gave a bad score for was the hotel gym, everything else was pretty good for a Hyatt Place in the middle of Arkansas.

But honestly, the gym was pretty crappy. The door was busted, so someone had to wedge it open with a towel. The aforementioned free weights, which were the only weight training equipment in the room, were five pairs of dumbbells ranging from 5 pounds to 25 pounds. That's fine if I'm a 65 year old woman suffering from osteoporosis, but not if I'm looking to actually work out. They also had a rack of towels, which would have been great, except they were pool towels that you had a hard time balancing on the treadmills. It was also about half the size of my hotel room, which does kind of explain the lack of equipment but in my mind, doesn't absolve them. It's freaking Arkansas, they've got more space everywhere.

There, in a nutshell, is my complete critique. A bit harsh maybe, but it's at least specific and to the point (it may also be colored by my own personal biases, which is a bad thing, but whatever). That could be construed as reasonable feedback.

But that's not what I wrote on the survey. I just wrote that the gym sucked.

And that's why I felt bad. Not because I used hurtful language, but because I did that and didn't even tell them how I thought they could fix the problem. I regret the decision.

Although not the word choice, because it really did kind of suck.

Social-Based E-Commerce (or how I bought a ton of new underwear and saved a crap load)

2011-07-24T11:40:00.000-07:00

There comes a time in every piece of workout gear's life when it starts to ask itself whether it's time to hang it up.

A pair of running shoes, a beat up T shirt, countless sets of athletic sock identical twins. With each successive workout, each spin cycle through the washing machine, and each tumble through the ridiculously hot dryer, they debate whether or not their calling is worth all the crap they have to go through to come back fresh for the gym drawer.

For most, the work doesn't really change, it just gets a little tougher. The elastic doesn't snap back as easily, the colors begin to fade, and the moisture wickinginess gets a little less wicky.

But they typically persevere, hanging in just long enough for a seam to burst during a ab crunch set or a yoga class. It's then that they are exposed, wardrobe malfunction style, and revealed to be past their prime. Mandatory retirement, and if they're lucky, a comfortable spot in a rag pile. The type of place that's well maintained and not far enough away from the gym drawer that they're workout clothes grandchildren can come visit (but they never do, those ingrates).

All those thoughts are what persuaded me to launch a workout clothes refresher campaign, or as I have also thought of it, 'Operation Keep the Boys in the House'. It's part of my isolationist platform.

It's a long-winded way of saying I needed some new workout undershorts.

I was debating the best way to buy up a new bunch of shorts, when Amex and Facebook came out with their 'Like, Link, Love', campaign.

Without going into too much detail (and skipping past all those thorny privacy concerns), if you link your American Express card to your Facebook account, the campaign allows you to sign-up for promotions at multiple retail partners.

The offerings range from the really crappy ($5 off online orders at Target), to the pretty darn interesting ($40 back from spending $100 at a Sheraton or Westin hotel).

The best part of the campaign, apart from the security of knowing Amex and Facebook can now get together and talk about you behind your back ('OMG, he spent how much at Chick-Fil-A last month?!?'), is the fact that these opt-in deals are automatically posted to your Amex credit statement.

The value in this cannot be overstated. The biggest problem with so many deals are the hoops the company forces you to jump through to collect on the reward. I'm still waiting for $40 worth of Staples rebates that I'm convinced were just a joke by the company to sell toner cartridges. With this campaign, the value of the deal is automatically credited onto your card. Sounded fantastic.

So as I perused the deals on this Facebook offering hoping for some kind of corporate marketing error I could take advantage of (100 Chick-Fil-A nuggets for 100 pennies or something), I came across one for the Sports Authority.

A $20 credit with any $50 purchase.

Awesome, I thought. Because Under Armor has managed to convince us we should pay $20 for a pair of oil-based undershorts, I'm always looking for a way to save on them. This would give me some much needed financial assistance.

But then, I remembered, Sports Authority also has a foursquare campaign running. If you check-in at a Sports Authority, you can get other deals.

So when I went to the store, I dutifully checked in on my phone. What benefit this is to Sports Authority, I'm not really sure, considering I only have one friend on foursquare and he lives in New Jersey. I doubt he would rush out to the Midwest if he found out I was buying new underwear (I mean, he might, but that seems extreme).

But with the check-in, I would get a $25 Sports Authority gift card for purchasing $100 worth of stuff. Again, remember that sports undershorts are absurdly expensive.

Suddenly, because I told the store that I was in it with my phone, and because I told my facebook account that I liked this deal, I got $45 off or in additional value to my purchase. It seemed like a totally kickass deal, and underscores the way we as consumers can make social marketing work for us.

Now I have a whole new gym drawer of Under Armor products, we won't have any problems at the gym, and I got a great value on the purchase.

All I had to do was give them a bunch of personal information. But then, I just wrote a huge long blog about the possibility of my testicles popping out of my gym shorts. Not my primary concern.

Las Vegas Bachelor Party

2011-05-15T09:22:00.001-07:00

In all the commotion with planning the wedding, I forgot to write up a recap of my bachelor party in Las Vegas.

OK, so part of it was the fact that I really couldn't decide what I should talk about, and what should be left to the persistence of my groomsmens' collective memory.

It's a tough call. Good meals, definitely in. Biblical knowledge of strange women, definitely out. Midget tossing, kind of a gray area. You see the problem.

What I can unequivocally confirm is that we had an awesome time in Las Vegas.

It was the first time I had ever traveled to Vegas with all of my brothers when they were over 21. Also the first time I traveled with my friends and brothers together. There were a lot of firsts on this trip. So that's how we'll review.

This list won't include everything that happened out there. But it should cover most of the details acceptable for public consumption

First Number 1:
Being relatively satisfied with a flight delay

The first interesting note of the trip doesn't even happen in Las Vegas, it happens in Midway Airport in Chicago. I was booked on a Southwest flight, and arrived in time to see we would be delayed two hours.

I was a little miffed, because this was eating into the time I could be gambling! I was also disappointed because now that my brothers and I are all over the place, we're rarely in the same place at the same time. So I wanted to get out there and join them already.

The Southwest gate agent came over the loudspeaker and told us there was a maintenance issue, and that we would have to wait for another plane to get to Chicago.

I remembered the recent incident where that hole in the roof blew out on a Southwest flight and how the problem extended across their fleet. I decided that it probably made sense for them to take extra precautions, even if it would deprive me of a chance to put on the in-flight oxygen mask (for the record, I would be great at this!)

But I also thought I was owed some compensation. A weather delay can't be blamed on the airline, but a maintenance delay sure can. I wanted to get reimbursed for my trouble and inconvenience, but I also didn't know what Southwest typically doles out in such situations. So I put on my most offended face and went to the customer service desk.

I told the rep how disappointed I was and how I was curious to know if Southwest would offer an apology or compensation.

The woman looked at me, puzzled, and asked if I would like her to apologize.

I'm not sure why she was so confused, but eventually she confirmed that she had absolutely no power to award me anything. No surprise there, but I did make sure to write customer service a letter after I got back. In response, they sent me a $100 voucher. Score! So before I even left for Vegas, I was up $100 (although I didn't know it)

First Number 2: Shooting Osama Bin Laden

You may have heard a little about this, it made the local news here in Chicago.

Now, it's true that Osama was actually killed in Pakistan, and I can't confirm nor deny whether my groomsmen and I are actually Navy SEAL Team 6, the ultra-top secret band of super soldiers that will soon be made into countless TV pilots, movie scripts, and video games.

But in terms of karma, all I can say is no sooner do my groomsmen and I blast away at targets of Osama Bin Laden, then the man himself is dead.

We were at the Las Vegas Gun Store, which is pretty much a bachelor party lock in Vegas, and a nightmare for gun control advocates (note: I'm a hardcore gun control nut, and I think if you own a gun you're at least a little bit insane, but I was willing to set those beliefs aside to have some fun. Call me a hypocrite, it was my bachelor party)

This store has a complete wall of automatic firearms, all of which should definitely be illegal (but many of which I'm sure are freely available to the insane and criminally inclined through the gun show loophole).

You go into this store, pick a bunch of guns, and wait your turn for the range to fire at targets of your choosing. I was actually a little disappointed by the targets. Sure Osama Bin Laden was there, a couple of other generic arab terrorist images, a Nazi zombie, typical stuff, but where was the ironical??? Would it be that ridiculous to have a group of nuns or the cast from Jersey Shore or something?

Anyway, I'm glossing over the best part. You get to pick guns and shoot them at stuff!

We all chose varying degrees of armament. I got a WWII package that included a couple machine guns, and then added a police sniper rifle to that. You could also get a 'Coalition' package that may as well have been called the Call of Duty Modern Warfare package, or a zombie package, which is fairly self explanatory.

I personally think they could expand by offering a Rap Star package, but I digress. We took turns blasting at these targets, learning valuable lessons like pistols are really hard and modern machine guns are suspiciously easy. We made all the targets pay, obliterating all of them with extreme prejudice, including a couple versions of Osama.

It was a hell of a lot of fun to shoot those things, even if they're as loud as hell, the range is uncomfortable, and the wait was absurd. I'm still glad I did it. And because of our actions, Osama Bin Laden has been brought to justice.

First Number Three: Sleeping under the watchful eye of the Terminator

We stayed at the Planet Hollywood hotel, which is a decent spot in a pretty good location on the Las Vegas strip. Now, I had never been in the PH rooms before, and was surprised to discover that each hotel room has its own movie theme.

Now these themes aren't just 'Movies', they are specific themes which are different for every room in the hotel. It's not even a genre thing, every room is decorated with stuff from an individual movie.

Sounds like a great idea in theory. But then you realize that there are like, 25 movies worth setting your hotel room around. Would it be cool to be in a room themed with props from the Godfather? No doubt. The Godfather II? Still great. Godfather III? You see where I'm going with this.

Movie themes are great until you're staying the the "Red Heat" room, decorated with crap from the Arnold Schwarzenegger/James Belushi Soviet-US buddy comedy.

This picture was above my bathtub:

Seriously? Weird. There was a portrait of Arnold in full Soviet military dress above my bed. A little bizarre, I feel like the Planet Hollywood guys didn't really think it through

With that said, it did give us a great conversational debate over what would be the absolute WORST image to put over the hotel room bed.

There were lots of contenders, but I'm pretty convinced the worst possible choice would be Jame Gumm (a.k.a. Buffalo Bill) in the Silence of the Lambs room. This is what it would look like:

Yeah. That'll be good to sleep to.

First Number Four: Getting bottle service with my father and future father-in-law:

For one of our nights in Vegas, the powers that be decided we would go big and check out Pure at Caesar's Palace.

Now Pure is a fairly popular nightclub, and with any fairly popular nightclub, the chances of getting in as a group of 10+ dudes by happenstance are exactly zero. There are just too many douchebags with finely trimmed beards, suit jackets with T-shirts, and clipboards to keep all that sausage out.

I don't have a problem with that, that's the way of the world. But to solve that problem, we got a table and four bottles of alcohol. Of course that caused other problems downstream, but it's what got us in the door and got my dad and my fiancee's dad a taste of the bizzaro world.

This is a world where unlike every college party, dive bar, fish fry, or box social you ever went to, there are actually a reasonable number of girls there. It's a world of loud music with the base turned up to the point where you can feel your kidneys pulsating, and flashing lights periodically work to convince you that you have epilepsy. It's also a world of bathroom attendants.

Take out the alcohol and the excessive cleavage, and it may be indistinguishable from a North Korean torture chamber. But those two things make all the difference.

It was a pretty amazing weekend, and I was glad that so many of my friends and family could go. Now I just have to figure out how to get another one.

The BluePrintCleanse Experience

2011-04-29T15:57:00.000-07:00

So earlier this week I participated in a 'team building' exercise with my current project team. I've done a bunch of them before, usually it's going out for a nice dinner, sometimes a baseball game, I've even gone to the movies.

This team building event involved us fasting for two days and subsisting on nothing but 12 bottles of various juices.

It's called a cleanse, specifically, the BluePrintCleanse, and I'm pretty sure it's a brilliant scam to rob yuppies of their disposable income.

Don't get me wrong, it was a fun idea for the team, and I enjoyed having the experience....but having said that, wow there is no way this can be healthy for anybody.

Here's how it works...

Step 1: You buy a cleanse package, in our case a 2-day cleanse
Step 2: You take delivery of a big stack of bottles. 6 for each day.
Step 3: You refrigerate the bottles quickly, because they'll go bad if left outside. They are also unpasteurized...which I thought wasn't even legal anymore
Step 4: Every two hours or so, drink another bottle of juice, trying not to vomit when you do
Step 5: Ta-Da, you're cleansed

OK, so you might read that and think, 'That's not so bad, it's just fasting for a couple days and sipping some fruit punch'

But wait, turns out the juices are freaking gross. A couple of them are OK, there was actually a cayenne pepper lemonade that I quite enjoyed, but the workhorse juice for the cleanse is a chunky green cocktail with the following ingredients:

- Romaine Lettuce
- Cucumber
- Celery
- Kale
- Parsley
- Apple

There may have been a couple other ones in there somewhere, but its a big chunky swamp thing cocktail of salad. You drink this three times a day.

So that's the gross part, which all things considered could be worse, but this cleanse also seems a little freaking dangerous. Strict calorie restriction to make your body feel better? I'm pretty sure they make public service announcements about why that's not a good idea.

The best part is the company that sells the cleanse disregards such concerns with some pretty awesomely ridiculous stuff. The following are exact copies from their FAQ, and if I had to guess, I'd say they definitely didn't clear it with the American Medical Association, or even the Sierra Leone Medial Association.

Q: I can’t eat anything at all? Is it enough calories?

A: It should be perfect for the duration of your cleanse. Even though it’s a calorically restrictive regimen, you are eliminating the energy required for digestion. This is a real boost to energy for other metabolic processes.

Q: Is it OK to exercise while cleansing?

A: Absolutely!! Can we please finally put to rest the myth that if you don’t eat a lot, you’ll lack energy? Unless one is undergoing a water fast, which, should only be done with a coach, energy levels will skyrocket! You will be amazed to see that the more you allow your digestive tract to rest, the more your energy gets a boost.

Q: Will I get light-headed if I’m not eating solid food?

A: On the contrary, one's mind becomes clearer and one's ability to solve problems enhances. This is because instead of large amounts of blood and nervous energies being sent to the digestive organs to break down a meal, that extra blood, oxygen, and energy is sent and utilized by the brain.

So to review...eating food is a distraction to your body, and keeps you from achieving your full potential. If you eat less, your body will be digesting less and will have more energy for other things! It sounds like something a Republican would say, 'Eat less to think better and have more energy!' because it's completely the opposite of all science, logic, and reason.

But that kind of talk must persuade people, or at least enough to keep the company in business. Certainly worked on us (although we were doing it for more of a team-building exercise than an actual health booster) as we guzzled down our green bottles and off-green bottles and even the occasional white bottle (a cashew nut milk, I'm still wondering how you milk a cashew).

So, we did this cleanse, did it work?

I don't think so, at least not for me. It was weird, because every single other person on my team woke up the next morning after the cleanse with splitting headaches, but I was totally fine. It's probably because I don't drink coffee, so that's as much as I could figure it did. Everyone who drinks a lot of coffee feels like crap, everyone else, about the same.

In either case, it's not something I plan on doing again

A Surplus of Plastic

2011-04-03T19:38:00.000-07:00

We've created a monster in our kitchen. It's a monster that lives under our sink, next to the garbage can and where we keep our dishwasher detergent. Every couple of days, it gets a little bigger.

I'm talking about this.

simplehuman Grocery Bag Holder, Wall-Mounted, Stainless Steel

Our plastic bag holder.

It started out innocently enough, as we stopped by a friend's apartment who extolled the virtues of the magical bag holder.

'It's so convenient,' they exclaimed, 'you always have bags when you need them and it's like $10!'

I have to admit, it all sounded so wonderful. Our apartment, no longer under siege from rampant plastic shopping bags. Our wet umbrellas, corralled at all times with a quick reach. Life would be so wonderful.

So we got the bag holder. We stuck it on our cabinet. And we began to fill it. Every shopping trip brought with it a fresh set of reinforcements. I eagerly stuffed them into the dispenser. 'More bags!' I'd declare, excitedly jamming Jewel bag after Jewel bag into the dispenser.

But the problem with a bag dispenser, is that you actually have to remove bags from the dispenser for the system to work. You can't just have deposits, you need to have withdrawals!

But we just don't have lots of uses for plastic bags. We don't have that many muddy shoes to bring home. Or dog walks to clean up after. Or people we need to suffocate.

So there were no withdrawals, and the dispenser grew. And grew. And grew.

Soon it grew too full. It's aluminum belly protruding, fat with the conquest of dozens of trips to the supermarket. It couldn't possibly take any more bags!

And so we've stopped feeding it, for now. But it still sits there with its store of bags, bursting at the seams. Part of it probably longs for relief, while another part of it yearns for more, leading it to make forceful advances on the roll of trash bags next door.

It's a problem we can't solve. We can't invent uses for these bags, and we can't throw them away.

So it will continue to sit, a reminder that tools to add convenience to our lives, sometimes just add a crap load of baggage

Addendum: Groupon and Living Social Thoughts

2011-03-30T20:34:00.001-07:00

What timing! As soon as I write my post on the thinking behind Groupon and LivingSocial's email timing strategy, a social media/email marketing guy from HubSpot shares his presentation on just what I was looking for.

Email open rates, unsubscribe rates, etc. based on time of day and day of the week.

Very interesting stuff. Although I do have some questions.

The chart in this presentation (which doesn't give a lot of context or explicit background, but it's free so I won't complain) which describes the clicks on emails by hour of the day.

It peaks around 6am, tapering off thereafter and remaining consistently low (with the lowest period between 2pm and 3pm).

I would be very interested to learn more about their data set, but this would suggest that you'll get twice the click-through by sending an email solicitation between 5am and 7am as you will if you send it between 2pm and 4pm.

This does make a fair bit of logical sense, if you assume that people get more and more sh*t to do over the course of the day and that to get their attention, you have to do it early.

However, the data also suggests that people are almost twice as likely to click through on weekends than on weekdays. That's interesting, and implies that most people aren't wasting their entire workday responding to junk email (or at least their wasting relatively more of their free time doing it).

If that's true, I wonder why the email marketing isn't more pronounced on weekends. I don't think I get more than one per day from both Groupon and LivingSocial on Saturdays and Sundays, but this data would imply that I'm twice as likely to open it then.

At any rate, it's late, I'm just thinking out loud, I should probably get some sleep. I'm sure I'll have some great solicitation emails pop in before I get up in the morning.

The Science of Timing

View more presentations from HubSpot Internet Marketing.

Et tu, PNC Bank?

2011-03-19T14:22:00.000-07:00

For years, I've been on a crazy money withdrawal binge. Anytime I was short on cash and needed a refill, I was hitting up whatever ATM was closest. I hate using cash and try to keep it to a minimum, but as long as there are disgruntled cab drivers, food trucks and strippers, I've always needed a little bit to get by. So I'd find an ATM and get it, wherever, without worry. It didn't matter what the bank was, I was withdrawing from it. Bank of America? Chase? Even the random cash machines in shady delis and bars, I never thought twice.

Would I accept the ATM fees? Yes please!

PNC Bank gave me that power. And now they're taking it away.

PNC has had a policy to reimburse ATM fees incurred anywhere, at any machine, at any time. It's been a great time to be a PNC customer.

I still remember when I had the first conversation with a PNC representative informing me:

"So wait, any ATM, anywhere, you guys reimburse the money?"

"Yes."

"Even if its an ATM on Mars, whatever the fee, you guys will reimburse it?"

"Yes."

"Wow!"

It sounded like a PNC commercial, which is effectively what I've been for the last four years.

While living in Chicago, anyone who ever brought up ATM fees would hear a quick spiel from me on the values of PNC Bank. It was perfect for someone like me, and I was happy to recommend them to others.

But now, the party's over.

Link to WSJ Article

As the press reports it, banks are all scrambling to replace revenue lost due to new financial system regulations. An easy way to do that? Raise ATM fees, or in PNCs case, stop paying for them.

So because they've had to stop screwing over other customers on overdraft fees or whatever, its coming back on the customers like me.

It sucks, big time, and for someone like me who has pimped out PNC to all kinds of people over the years, it almost feels like a betrayal.

I know, that's a little serious for someone to feel that way thanks to a banking regulation change. And the financial burden probably isn't a huge thing (my estimate at ~$60/year assuming one withdrawal a month and $5 each way). But it just gets me so ticked off.

But still. Come on PNC!

I don't know why I'm appealing to a monolithic financial institution, as if in response their ATM screens will suddenly shed a little computerized tear, its grinch-like heart will swell, and it will burst forth from its brick encasing and run down the street handing out cash.

That seems like an unlikely scenario.

It's just a shame. I really enjoyed that policy. We had some great times together. Las Vegas casinos. A Costa Rican airport. Some weird Ecuadorian bank that one time.

And now it's over. Now I need a new bank.

Why Groupon and LivingSocial Share the Spotlight

2011-03-17T19:34:00.000-07:00

I'm a consultant, and as a consultant in the digital era, I'm always on email on my smartphone. Like Wilford Brimley checks his blood sugar, I check it and check it often.

My policy on the phone is that if it vibrates, I'm grabbing it. It's the exact opposite of my policy on rattlesnakes.

But I've been thinking specifically about two emails I receive. Like clockwork every morning, I get a couple vibrations from the same sources. Sometimes they even travel together, the same big vibration, sharing the carpool lane on AT&T's clogged network highway.

One is always from Groupon. And the other is always from LivingSocial.

They always come in the morning between around 7 and 9, offering whatever crazy discounts they've cooked up. The companies have near-identical business models, and they appear to have the exact same tactical strategy with regard to their email offer delivery.

But why are they always at the same time?

I ask because to me, it seems that if you were a marketing email, you would absolutely not want to arrive at the exact same time as other marketing emails. You wouldn't want simultaneous delivery of TV commercials, or highway billboards, multiple messages take away the distinct attention you would get by being the only one.

Now, this is only an issue if a couple assumptions hold. One, that enough of the subscriber bases overlap. Groupon has 50 million customers, LivingSocial 20 million, as of January. A really quick google search didn't turn up anything on overlap, but if nothing else they have at least one overlapping customer, me. So in my own personal user survey, that's 100% of customers, and that's good enough for me.

The other assumption is that people react upon reception. By that I mean, when people get an email, they respond to it immediately or near-immediately, as opposed to checking their inbox at a certain time of day. If people didn't react upon reception, then it wouldn't matter when you sent the darn thing, the customer would check it when they're good and ready. Maybe those types of people don't like to check personal email at work, maybe they don't have internet access, or maybe they like to save all their daily emails to enjoy with a glass of wine and a hot bubble bath. But this all seems pretty unlikely.

So independent timing might matter. Let's assume it does.

Why then, do both companies send their emails at exactly the same time? If you would want to be independent and get received with no other marketing emails, you'd need a pretty good reason to not do that. So we can infer that both Groupon and LivingSocial think their timing has enough benefit to outweigh the fact that it arrives co-mingled with its primary rival.

I tried to think of what that benefit could be.

The first thing I thought of was, FIRST! Of course.

If you've ever read an article on the internet, you've probably seen a comments section. That's the section below the article that lets all the anonymous douchebaggery of the internet distill itself into unmoderated free-for-alls. It's an amazing way to see how an article on a kitten rodeo can turn into an all caps debate on whether Obama is a muslim or hitler, or which side of the inevitable race war will win. But it also features the FIRST! phenomenon, where the first commenter has to let everyone know that they got there first by writing, FIRST!, in capital letters.

Why send a deal email earlier in the morning? To be FIRST!

The theory here would be that, if you're the first email in the inbox for the day, more people will read you. And if you're the first marketing email they read, the more likely you'll actually pay attention or buy something. Everyone's marginal utility for marketing emails probably declines fairly quickly if it's even positive at all.

So being first is good? But, if it is, then why aren't Groupon and LivingSocial perpetually engaged in a fight for FIRST! rights? Why don't I get emails at 6am, or 5am? Why is their no arms race for FIRST! rights if being first is so valuable? Is it not like two competing city newspapers with editors chain-smoking cigarettes demanding the latest story to get it to print and out there before the rival Tribue/Chronicle/Picayune?(for any younger readers, some cities used to have two newspapers back in the day, and there was no internet apparently, weird)

I take that as a sign that first isn't the biggest driver.

The second thing I wondered, is if it was all about social behavior and deal sharing. These companies offer deals for a fixed window of time, just 24 hours. They also want people to share the deals with each other. Could they be emailing at the start of each day to maximize the window for sharing?

If you think of each deal as a decaying radioactive element with a certain half-life, then you could imagine each deal starting and creating a certain amount of social capital/excitement. Let's call it virality. Every deal has its own natural level of virality and that declines over time as the deal gets exposed.

One could argue that you want the initial exposure of that deal at the beginning of the day, because the excitement around it declines and you want to maximize the number of consecutive waking hours at the beginning of the 24 hour period. Opening the deal at 8am means the deal could be available for most people to buy for 15 consecutive hours assuming an 11pm bedtime. Opening a deal at noon, would mean you'd only get 11 consecutive hours, then have to restart momentum the next morning.

Note: This wouldn't apply to insomniacs, but independent film has taught me that insomniacs spend all their time either as professional hitmen or looking for an emotionally complicated insomniac of the opposite gender but with identical taste in music.

So this social element could play a factor. LivingSocial's model, with its emphasis on sharing deals (share to three people and get it for free), seems to align with this theory. But Groupon's doesn't. Groupon doesn't give a free deal for sharing, although they do have some kind of referral bonus.

So maybe it also plays a role, but I'm not convinced it's the major driver.

In the end, I think the major factor is establishing consistency and building a routine around it.

Like the whole Pavlov's dog thing, Groupon and LivingSocial send me emails each morning around the same time. Over time, by emailing at the same time day after day after day, they're training me to look for their emails.

I don't think they're going so far as to get me to drool every time I hear a ding in my inbox. But I wonder if they've done any kind of analysis to see whether people are more likely to open/respond to a solicitation if they know it's coming.

I'd bet that's a huge factor, to be added with our FIRST! and our Social variables.

But I'm still not convinced that it's necessarily the best way for them to go. I'd assume they've done their homework, but honestly, these are really young companies. Isn't it possible that they just made a decision at some point and it's built on itself?

That's why if I were at Groupon or LivingSocial, I would be running experiments on my customers 24/7.

One of the lessons I took away from my Experiments in Firms class at UChicago, was that direct mail was the easiest form of marketing to experiment with and measure customer response. We talked about it often, using it to illustrate concepts of experimentation, in part because it was so straightforward. A control group, a test group, people generally don't interact with regard to their mail, easy.

There's no real reason you can't do the exact same with email. Sure, email is much easier to share and expose. But if you wanted to experiment with delivery timing, it would be easy as hell. I would argue you could also experiment with types of offerings to specific customer sub-groups. That's my nice way of asking Groupon to stop sending me deals on bikini waxes. I will not buy one, no matter how many times you suggest it!

I don't even think you'd need to experiment to get data on something like the optimal email delivery time (although it sure makes sense to me). These companies have mobile applications that require customers to actually open them up to check for deals. I'd start right there to see when people are checking. To me, that would be an indication of when they're interested. Of course, no sooner to I write that, I read about Groupon's new 'Groupon Now' feature.

I guess it wouldn't be the first time a multi-billion dollar company was a step ahead of me.

The End Game for Online Gambling

2011-03-02T06:48:00.000-08:00

Saw this article in this morning's Wall Street Journal on the future of online gambling.

http://on.wsj.com/eWeBvx

There's not a ton of breaking news here, but it reminds me that the key question for online gambling in the United States isn't a question of if, it's a question of when.

The country (and especially the individual states) are in a financial mess, leaving out the question of whether they should continue deficit spending to bolster the overall economy.

My assumption for the reason gambling bills have failed historically is that the costs to politicians in the form of angry voters outweighed the benefits they would receive in the form of economic growth + campaign contributions.

However, in an environment when funding for many programs will need to be cut, the relative significance of online gambling evils will continue to decline relative to other changes in play. By that I mean, the whiny losers who rain on all our gambling parades by decrying it as sinful will stop caring about it when we need to close schools and police stations (or more in line with their priorities, abstinence education or some other such nonsense).

With the costs of legalizing online gambling reduced, politicians can now feel more comfortable in pursuing the legislation. Indeed, that is what we're starting to see from states like New Jersey, who would structurally face lower angry voter costs thanks to their current legalized gambling.

Where does this play out? I'm hoping it ends with me being able to do in-game wagering on NFL games from my iPhone on Sundays whenever the NFL starts playing again (Although Apple's historically been another prude when it comes to this stuff, so maybe I'd need to buy a Droid). With Illinois in the financial toilet, it's my hope that that version of the future isn't too far off.

Watson

2011-02-19T16:51:00.000-08:00

It was a sad week in our household this week. It was inevitable, that the day would come, a day which many others have experienced, but a new one for me.

The elevator operator.

The pony express rider.

The medicinal leech farmer.

Where are they now? Gone. Lost in the sands of time as they were replaced by more modern solutions (although I'm confident the occasional medicinal leech farmer hobbyist is still out there).

And now that IBM has introduced its Watson computer, and Watson has handily destroyed the best Jeopardy players of all time, it looks like the era of the quiz show trivia specialist is coming to its end.

We've had a good run, the Van Doren cheating scandal notwithstanding. Our shows were broadcast to millions, and the adoring public basked in the glow of our useless knowledge. The capital of Afghanistan. The more obscure works of Liszt. The name of Hitler's dog. These facts were ours, weapons put to use in epic nerd battles of syndicated television.

Now it's all just stuff in a computer.

And I suppose that's OK. If it took a team of the most brilliant scientists in the country several years and $100 million dollars to build a machine the size of several rooms that works to do something I can do rolling out of bed, that's not the worst thing in the world.

It's also not that much of a surprise. With more powerful computers and more closely tied information networks, data gathering and storage is becoming easier and easier. Whereas in the past, the knowledge and ability to recall specific pieces of information was a highly valued skill (a good doctor who could diagnose an illness, a stockbroker who knows tons of stocks), now the facts themselves are table stakes. Everyone has them, and advances like Watson makes it even easier to get the answers you need.

But, as we saw when Watson called Toronto a U.S. city last night, the technology isn't perfect yet. And until those tools are foolproof, the valuable skill won't be knowing information (though it would help), it will be the ability to use the right tools in the right ways to find the information. Because, simply put, there's a crapload of data out there, and unless you know how to find what you need it's really tough to find anything (how many ehow search results can there really be?)

But I also think that this premium on the ability to use information search tools is a temporary one. As the tools get even better, they'll become even more precise and able to understand our language even better (imagine a more confident Watson, one that knows Toronto is in Canada).

So what happens then?

Then we'll have all kinds of data and information. Complete overload. At that point, finding information should be easier, but you'll need the skills to analyze it and critically examine it.

As I've seen so often in consulting, data in the wrong hands can be very dangerous.

So you'll need smart people who can actually look at and interpret data. This isn't just anyone. It's a set of people who pay attention to detail, who can recognize patterns, and who spot crappy analysis a mile a way (i.e., the people who read footnotes)

In short, the right people are those with skills like my fiancee, who specializes in data analytics. The wrong people are those that don't want to understand detail and have no interest in thinking about where their data comes from.

But that's OK. I'm fine with retiring early.

A Groom's Guide to the Wedding Registry: Seven Rules to Save Your Life

2010-12-30T14:44:00.000-08:00

I’m getting married this May. It’s going to be a very exciting time, and I’m very much looking forward to it. It’s gradually taking over most of my existence, which is kind of what happens in these things (or so I hear).

As we get closer, my fiancée and I have started to get deep into one of the major logistical nightmares of the modern wedding industrial complex, registering.

It’s supposed to be fun as you guys plan your future lives together. That’s what they’ll tell you anyway.

I’m here to level with you. The single most important thing about registering for your wedding is survival. Just make sure you get out alive. All the stuff that gets put on your list? It’s nice if you like it, and in an ideal world, you’ll both be ecstatic with everything. But to be frank, just try not to get yourself killed.

With that in mind, I wrote up a list of some guidelines for all you future grooms out there. Just some general advice I wish they had handed out in some kind of pamphlet before I wandered into this world like an Oregon Trail greenhorn who forgot extra wagon wheels.

Rule One – Schedule Your Registering Sessions Appropriately

If you’re planning to register on any given day, it’s natural to plan for the specific items you’ll be looking for. You might target kitchen appliances, bedding, dishes, whatever. You’re also going to plan for an approximate amount of time to dedicate that day. A couple hours, etc. Take whatever time you’re planning to spend registering for that day and double it. Now, take whatever you’re planning to get done that day, and cut that in half. However you originally plan your day, you’re going to get half as much done in twice the amount of time. I think it’s some kind of natural law.

This becomes of huge importance if there is anything else you’re trying to schedule for that day. If you’re a college football fan, don’t schedule anything registry related on a Saturday. Same goes for Sunday if you’re an NFL fan. You can also strategically suggest registering for a time that coincides with your team’s bye week or if they’re playing on an off-night (e.g., Thursday night football). This move will actually win you some points if you don’t mention the fact that your team isn’t playing but still volunteer to go shopping.

Rule Two – Come Prepared

You are going to be spending a lot of time in stores with tons of products you have little if any interest in. Make no mistake, this will be boring. But in a surprising twist, it will also be very physically strenuous. That’s something I didn’t understand until my sixth hour in a Bed bath and Beyond, when I had walked the equivalent of ten miles through the bedding section and all I wanted was a Brett Favre-level painkiller injection (or as an alternative, the sweet caress of death).

Wear. Comfortable. Shoes.

For those of you with back problems, I might also recommend a brace to help maintain proper alignment. You should wear comfortable clothing, and in layers, so that you can add or subtract elements should conditions change. Eating a nutritious breakfast is recommended, with at least some form of complex carbohydrates to provide energy. Consider packing some snacks.

Rule Three – Pay Attention

Sounds easy enough. After all, how hard is it to wander around a store and look at things?

Turns out it can be really freaking hard. Why? Because there are so many things!

You know how many different patterns of china there are?

You know which stores carry which lines of towels?

You know the difference between a quilt and a coverlet?

These are all questions you will soon know the answer to! This process will wear you down mentally because there are no less than a trillion potential combinations of your future home, and your fiancée will probably be interested in exploring most of them.

You want to respect the process, so you should want to pay attention. But these stores don’t make it easy. They do, however, throw us one bone to keep us interested.

The portable scanner.

This is a little device that you use to zap the bar codes of things that you want to add to your registry. If you get a little imaginative, you can think of it like a gun, which is nice.

As a man, it has been universally decided that it will be your job to carry the gun and use it to shoot things. This applies to wedding registries as well.

You have to look at it like an honor. Sure, they’ve taken a scanning job that normally is done by a sales clerk earning minimum wage and pressed you into it, but look at the bright side, you get to shoot things.

This will help you keep your focus. You can also try to make a game of it. How far away can I be and still shoot that thing? Can I do it upside down? Can I do it behind the back?

This will help you pay attention and maintain some semblance of sanity.

Rule Four – If You Can’t Pay Attention, FAKE IT!

Obviously paying attention for the duration of your registry activity is impossible. Even Jesus Christ would lose his mind when forced to choose between the 18th and 19th different china patterns. Our minds will wander, this is inevitable.

The risk here is being called out on it. No one wants that, and if business school prepared me for nothing else, it’s the ability to sound as though you’re paying attention even when you have no clue where you are or what you’re doing there.

These potential cold calls can come at any time. You’ll be walking around the store, looking at whatever, and you just kind of glaze over. Happens to me all the time.

Suddenly, she’ll ask you a question. And you, not paying attention, will not have heard her.

The first thing to do in this situation is to freeze. Don’t move, and don’t panic. Continue staring at whatever you were staring at before, I don’t care if it’s a fabulous duvet cover or a damaged ceiling tile, you keep staring.

Now, the second piece of advice. Do not say ‘What?’ That tells her you weren’t paying attention. Others to avoid, ‘Huh?’, ‘Beg your pardon?’, and ‘I really thought we would be done an hour ago’

OK, so that’s what not to say. So what should you do?

You keep staring at whatever you had your eye on, assuming it’s not some other woman, in which case for god’s sake deploy standard male countermeasures. You look at whatever that object is, make some kind of mental observation, slowly turn to your fiancée, and turn that observation into a question. It won’t relate directly to whatever she’s talking about, but it will indicate that you’re paying attention to the registry process, which should be good enough.

Example: Your fiancée is comparing the weights and feel of different water pitchers (because apparently a Brita isn’t good enough). Meanwhile, you got bored and started running your hand along the edge of a riveted ice bucket, just to make sure you were still alive. She turns to ask you which pitcher you like.

What do you do? You freeze. You then note a quality about the ice bucket, turn, and respond with a question. Potential questions could include:

a) You know, I really like the edging on this bucket, what do you think?
b) Why would anyone be interested in this ice bucket? This edging looks terrible!
c) Do you think this bucket would fit with our other serving pieces? (Bonus points might be awarded if you can successfully relate your question to things you’ve already registered for or seen)

This should show that you are paying attention to where you are and what you’re doing. It may also result in registering for an ice bucket, but it’s a small price to pay.

Rule Five – Money Is No Object…Apparently

I’m not the biggest shopper in the world, but I always liked to believe that I understood the basic economic principles behind retail commerce. I have two degrees in business for god’s sake! But nothing has shaken that belief more than my registering experience.

Don’t assume the price for anything, absolutely anything, will be a reasonable amount. The price can be any amount, they are seemingly assigned at random, and no matter what it is, try not to be surprised (and don’t assume things are priced in some kind of foreign currency that multiplies everything by a hundred, such assumptions are dangerously inaccurate).

You would think there might be a natural order to things. Bigger things are more expensive, or shinier things, or even more practical things. This could not be further from the truth. In fact, there may actually be an inverse relationship. The less practical something is, the more likely it will cost a fortune. You may laugh, but you’ll realize what I’m talking about when you register for salt and pepper shakers that cost eleventy bazillion dollars.

In these situations, you simply have to understand that it is what it is. Ours not to reason why. And whatever you do, you absolutely cannot react by trying to establish any kind of link between the real universe and the bizarro wedding registry world. Sure, if you combined two serving pieces, a picture frame, and whatever the hell votives are, you could probably buy a giant HDTV. Avoid such comparisons at all costs! I’ll leave it to the brilliant physicists with slide rules to explain, but I’m fairly certain that entering a home goods store for a registry flips you through some kind of interdimensional vortex, the other side of which is not unlike Lewis Carroll’s wonderland. Down is up, big is small, hamburgers eat people, and so on.

Just hang in there, nod occasionally, and do not eat any mushrooms.

Rule Six – Watch Out, You Will Need to Have Opinions

Your fiancée will expect you, the future groom, to have opinions on things for your registry (and, I might add, your future lives together). You will often be asked to give input, and to say you have no opinion (which is generally the case) is not an effective option.

She’ll tell you that you can’t have absolutely no opinion, and she’ll tell you that she really does want to know what you think. She’ll swear to this.

However, she is 100% lying to you. Your opinion does not matter.

I realize it’s obvious to most of us, but it’s definitely true. At some point in her life, your fiancée thought all about this process of getting married and moving to the next phase of her life and all that jazz. She envisioned a guy there, but was probably vague on the actual details of who you actually were.

Now you’re there, congratulations! Please don’t interfere!

You see, it’s not that you don’t deserve an opinion, it’s just that you’re Norway.

Huh?

You’re Norway, the country in Europe, that’s you. Your fiancée is the U.S.A.

You see what I’m getting at?

Let’s say we’re all at the United Nations, and a big issue comes up to a vote. Well, everyone is going to listen to what the U.S. has to say about it. Everyone’s wondering, where’s the U.S. going to be?

You’re Norway. You get a vote too, but no one gives a sh*t. Your country is ranked 35th in military power (according to GlobalFirePower.com, which sounds potentially legitimate), you do OK, people like you.

But let’s get one thing straight Knut, when American tells you what they think, you just fall in line and don’t ask any questions, or you’ve smoked your last herring.

So yeah, have an opinion, but don’t get too attached to it.

Rule Seven – If You Really Feel Strongly About Something, That’s OK, Just Be Careful

All that stuff I said in Rule Six applies here. Your opinion really doesn’t matter, and will generally be disregarded if it doesn’t fit with your fiancee’s plan (an appropriate analogy, you are a respected climatologist/economist/physician/person with a higher education, and your fiancée is a hardcore Republican).

However, if there are things that you genuinely want or don’t want, there are a couple tricks you can use (and strategies to avoid) that can be effective.

a) Know your sphere of influence: The easiest place for you to get what you want is in the male-centered area of the registry. So if you do feel strongly about it, play that gender card whenever you get into this space. This applies to things that you’ll typically be doing or your fiancée has no interest in. It commonly applies to areas including grills, grill-related accessories, kitchen knives, anything that could seriously injure someone really. This is an area where you can reasonably make that point that you’ll use the items more often, so work that angle.

b) If you hate something, make the right argument against it: There have been a number of things we’ve registered for that have been points of contention. Things that we disagree on. As per my earlier Rule Six, I’ll usually get outranked. In some of these cases, I’ve tried to make carefully reasoned arguments to support my perspective. Do not do this, as I can tell you right now it won’t work. In some cases, I tried to explain how a significant investment in a serving piece couldn’t possibly make sense unless we used it enough times, and we certainly wouldn’t in this case. In others, the item in question was perfectly suited for a specific situation, a situation that might happen every other decade or so. Every time I explained these thoughts, it would meet with a similar response. ‘But I just kind of like it.’

To which I had no response.

What I’ve since figured out, is that if I really really hate something, I can’t fight it with rationalism. I need to fight it by normalizing the genderized perspective (which is to say, lying)

Example: Say my fiancée was interested in an ornate eight foot high candy dish in the shape of Carl Weathers from the movie Rocky III. This is purely hypothetical, because I haven’t seen anything like that in reality, and because I would think it was totally awesome. At any rate, let’s say my fiancée wanted it, and let’s say for some crazy reason, I didn’t. What would I say to persuade her?

I certainly wouldn’t talk about how little we’d actually use it. I wouldn’t talk about how hard it would be to fit in our house. I wouldn’t talk about the painstaking cleaning process, or its financial cost, or even its lack of aesthetic appeal. All of these are dead ends.

What I would say, is that I know someone (must be female, a friend from school, a cousin, someone else who typically won’t speak to your fiancee), who has that exact one and has had nothing but trouble with it. I might talk about how she never uses it, or how she can’t find a good place for it, or how she hates cleaning it.

You’ll notice my arguments would be the exact same, just from a different person. When presented with the evidence from a female perspective, my fiancée might just be more inclined to listen to what I have to say. As long as it’s coming from a woman, and not from her lunk-head fiancée, it might be worth considering.

Conclusion

You might go through all this and have a bunch of questions (e.g., Wow, why the hell is anyone marrying you, you jackass?). I can’t answer most of them, or wouldn’t really want to, and only hope that anyone whose read this far found it entertaining if not informative. I’m sure I’ve left some valuable lessons out, but that’s what I remember off the top of my head.

Take it with the spirit in which it’s intended. Enjoy getting married, and when you’re in the midst of registering, just be careful out there.

Football and NFL sabermetrics

2010-11-21T15:15:00.000-08:00

My friends and I are huge football fans, and recently we got into a ridiculously long email discussion about the study of football, how to get smarter about analyzing it, and the natural obstacles to doing so.

It was fun to think about, and thought it would be worth saving onto the blog (bonus: it counts as a blog post, much of which was contributed by other people!)

These emails were slightly edited for length and content, as well as superfluous profanity and racial slurs.

To: Everyone

From: Matt

Subject: the state of my football fanhood

so yesterday it became clear to me upon watching the eagles that michael vick is actually a very good quarterback nowadays. i had previously thought that vick was overrated. i now feel like i was wrong. my issue is that i dont trust the media or anyone to give me information about football.

here's the issue. for two decades, i was a big phillies, buckeyes, and eagles fan. i listened to what the announcers/beat writers/espn told me, and they all painted this same view of sports with this movie-like depiction of sports as the team who tries harder always triumphs, and how 99% of success is mental, how you can always infer who is the best team from who won the game, especially a big game. and now i know that is all bullshit. i know better now. having researched baseball, i now know that announcers and beat writers are always doing a mixture of trying to fill space, projecting things onto players, and trying to make it seem like they know something that no fan could know on their own.

this has made baseball viewing immeasurably more enjoyable for now. because of my own research, i can watch a pitcher and know that he is more likely to continue his success if he's blowing the ball past hitters instead of inducing shallow flyouts, and i like watching as an expert. carry this over to football. i listen to announcers say the same kind of things, ascribe mental toughness as the reason that everything happens, insist that we learned who the best team was based on who won, and all that stuff. and i know they're wrong. i no longer feel like i can be a couch expert like i felt six years ago when i watched the eagles go to the super bowl. i don't think i know better, something almost every fan thinks sometimes, because i know i don't. i've learned that the people making decisions-- GMs, coaches, etc.-- these are experts, and i know that they are surely wrong sometimes but i don't trust announcers, beat writers, couch experts, anyone, to tell me.

so i find myself caring less about football. last night's game would have left me with a great feeling all day today, and while i enjoyed it-- particularly since i am surrounded by redskins fans-- i don't feel like i know much other than i should defer to andy reid on personnel issues, and that he is almost always right. i'd read football outsiders, but i would need a primer on what i was reading. so i'm in football fanhood limbo. i know i love watching football, but i don't like it as much because i feel like i don't understand what i'm watching with the understanding i want to, and i don't feel like i have enough information to know what i'm watching.

To: Everyone

From: Jared

Subject: RE: the state of my football fanhood

You're saying you don't like it as much because you don't have as much information. I can understand that. However, you're operating under the assumption that the information you're looking for EXISTS, when I would argue that in most cases it doesn't. I love watching football, and while I like to think that I understand the game pretty well, and I understand the players pretty well, I'm also comfortable with a few key facts.

1 - So much of the game is randomly determined, I would argue more so than any other major sport

2 - The information we would need to understand the game at a more sophisticated level is not available, so we take what we can get and use what we have

Unless you become comfortable with that level of ignorance, and the lack of objective measures, you may continue to have a tough time enjoying the game.

There are a few problems with trying to understand the game of football on a level akin to what we can in baseball. I think there are three major roadblocks...

1 - The 'Why Didn't He Block that Guy!' Problem

2 - The 'He Won't Show Up on the Box Score But He's Got Tons of Guts' Problem

3 - The 'Thanks for Falling for the Play Action Camera Guy' Problem

Problem 1 - This is the most fundamental obstacle to understanding what's going on in the game. To me, it's a problem of determining intent. If we know what a player's intent on a particular play is, we can in many cases objectively measure whether or not they have succeeded. In a game like basketball, it's often very easy because each player has generally the same responsibilities and those responsibilities are almost always connected to points. A player shoots to score, passes to assist. We can see what % of shots they make. No one shoots with the intent of missing. In a game like baseball, it's also fairly straightforward. A batter looks to get a hit or a walk. A runner tries to steal. A pitcher tries to get an out. Again, all the roles in hitting and pitching are consistent. They are the same for everyone (and I'm simplifying obviously. Basketball defense is tough to measure, baseball pitchers might look to induce double plays, pitch around guys, hitters might sacrifice, etc.)

However, in the game of football, we have two major elements that blow determining intent out of the water. The first is a matter of complexity. There are 22 starters on offense and defense, most of which are in very different roles, QB, WR, OT, etc. Each of these specialists is responsible for completely different tasks, and those tasks can be completely different from play to play. So even if we knew what everyone was trying to do, all the time, you'd still be left to think about all those permutations yourself and try to analyze it as you watched. That is a recipe for a trip to Crazytown.

But it doesn't stop there, it gets worse! In other sports we have an advantage in determining intent. We can guess with good accuracy what the player is trying to do! A hockey player wants to shoot the puck in the goal every time he takes a shot. In the simplest example, what does a 100M runner want to do? He wants to run as fast as possible (unless he's in a slowest man wins kind of race in some sort of opposite day scenario)

I would dare anyone to watch one NFL game, even one drive, maybe even one play, and tell me exactly what each player was SUPPOSED to be doing, what they were TRYING to do. It's just about impossible. Each play is designed for the eleven men to be coordinated in completing a variety of tasks. What kind of blocking assignments are the offensive linemen picking up? Is the RB supposed to chip the defensive end? And then what route is he assigned to run? Is the slot WR running a square out or a square in? Unless we know what these guys are supposed to do, we have no freaking clue of whether they're actually doing it!

If this were a Madden world, we'd be all set. Because we'd know each play called on offense and defense, we'd have a record of what everyone was supposed to do. But we don't live in a Madden world (to the dismay of John Madden, who would probably be some sort of Emperor and travel in an even bigger bus)

Some times you'll see an offensive lineman standing around, not blocking anybody, and the QB gets sacked. And you'll scream, 'why didn't you block that guy!?!' Maybe the lineman blew his assignment, but it's also possible that someone else blew theirs.

Problem 2 - This is a large part of what you describe in your email. We know what writers and announcers tell us, and it seems logical. So and so is a great leader. That guy is focused on his contract. Etc. You also describe why they say such things, and that's because they have to! The NFL is the most popular sport in the country, and demands round the clock coverage. In a world with a lack of objective measurement (in part because of problem #1), what are we left with? We have to say something. So we get the cliches. (As an aside, I almost never trust anything any TV or national football guy says. They simply have too much to focus on, following all the teams at once. You can't possibly know a lot of valuable insight regarding each team. An exception to that would be someone who watches a sh*t-ton of game film and illustrates it for you. Ron Jaworski does that a lot and has a show that is on ESPN at some god-awful early hour where they only do that. I love that show, most of the rest is just noise to me)

If we had objective statistics, we might make some headway. But we're not there yet, and I'm not sure how close we can even get due to problem #1. The stats that are thrown around today are, to put it diplomatically, less than ideal. By now most people are comfortable with the idea that Rushing Yards isn't the best measure of a running back, because if I were playing for the Eagles, and I received 10,000 handoffs, I could potentially gain 1000 yards. Of course, I'd also be dead, but you get the point. Yards per carry is a marginally better indicator, but even that can't distill it perfectly, because a running back is hugely dependent on his teammates and their ability to execute. It's also very dependent on the situation the running back finds himself in. Example: running back A gains 12 yards on a draw play, and running back B gains 3 yards. Who's better? In identical situations, running back A. But if running back A gained his 12 yards on a 3rd down and 26 yards to go, while running back B gained 3 yards on a 3rd and 2, it's a very different answer. Oh yeah, and that's for a running back, who at least gets his outcome measured. Good luck on an offensive lineman or a safety!

This is in large part what Football Outsiders is trying to address with their DVOA stat. It tries to evaluate each player's actions given the situation faced, with adjustments for things like opposing defense. I know it's not perfect, and they'd tell you the same thing, but it's an attempt to isolate the player by himself, because we just don't have good stats to measure them.

There are some others out there trying other things. There's KC Joyner for ESPN, but I'm even less convinced by his work because I looked through a sample of his book some years ago and saw lots of tables on things like, WR Success Catching Out Patterns, where they were ordered by percentages but it was often a sample size of 4. There's another one who's name escapes me, but they have someone watch and grade each player on each play. Don't even get me started on the red flags there. But the work is advancing.

However, until it makes a ton of progress, we're still going to hear about guts because we don't know enough about anything else, and we have to say something.

Problem #3 - The last major problem on my list, is simply one of data availability. In football, well, there really isn't any. These guys are data hoarders, laughing maniacally in their houses amidst piles and piles of game film that none of us will ever see. Or maybe they're just not as open minded, I prefer the former.

If any of us really wanted to understand the game, and understand the strengths and weaknesses of players, we would watch game film and we'd watch a lot of it. We'd look at the coaches cameras, and we'd play it back over and over and over. Then you'd be able to see specific plays where individuals messed up, where someone may have made the wrong read, where someone didn't get a good block.

But we don't have that, not by a long shot. We only get to watch the game on TV, from the network perspective. Hell, our view for that isn't even good. We never have any idea what the safeties are up to when the ball is snapped. Brian Dawkins could have been starting each play all these years from the crane kick position. We'd never know without the game film, and no one has the game film outside of a) coaching staffs, and b) NFL Films I think. I have no clue why they keep it so tight. Coaches/GMs might not want it publicly available I suppose.

The NFL also doesn't put out a ton of great data on the plays of each game. They have a game book for each one, but it leaves a lot to be desired. As someone who helped Football Outsiders with gathering their play-by-data, I'm more than familiar with that mess. It all adds up to a world in which getting more information is very very difficult.

So we live in a world where we're not sure exactly what the players are supposed to be doing, we don't have a great way to measure what they do do, and we can't get access to the information we'd need to confirm what we even thought they did.

It means we're really kept from performing deep analysis on the game. But that doesn't mean you can't understand it better. I'd start by not paying attention to what the announcers say, especially if it's Joe Buck (not because he's particularly wrong, just because he's a jerk). That's job #1. Other things that I try and do is look at the plays objectively, don't just watch the skill players, and mentally discount situations where luck is pretty freaking obvious.

It's still a great sport to watch, and don't feel concerned that you don't understand it like you want to. You need to understand that no one else does either, and you're view is probably as good as anyone not on the sidelines.

To: Everyone

From: Matt

Subject: RE: the state of my football fanhood

Alright, Jared, I hear what you’re saying and I agree. There probably is not very good data out there and football, so conclusions are hard to come by. I think that maybe I gave the impression that my issue is that I want to have a better relative understanding of what went on. That’s not the issue. I want to have an objective understanding of what happened enough that I can infer something about what happened on the play I just watched other than “Michael Vick through the ball far and DeSean Jackson caught the ball.”

Like, I want a crib notes of Moneyball for football. Like, I’m pretty sure that going for it on 4th down is probably a good idea all the time at midfield and punting from the opponents’ 38 is bad. I like that. I can work with that. You told me once that kickers are not consistently good at kicking short field goals or maybe long field goals, which one? I can work with that fact whichever way it goes.
I want basic things to know about football, whatever can be inferred. Enough that I know something about what types of positions are overrated and underrated. Who was the most underrated player in the victory? Can we say something about why yesterday’s game went the way it went?

On the luck issue, while the 16 game season makes games inherently dependent on luck to win enough games, the spread of talent in football in terms of how well teams can beat other teams is very big in football. If you figure out the standard deviation of football win percentages net of the natural standard deviation that you’d get from luck, and then do the same for baseball, there’s still like twice as much variance in team skill level in football than baseball on a per game basis. Which makes sense because you’d never see a baseball team given a 90% chance to win a game on pinnaclesports.

So really I just want some understanding of what I’m seeing. If I can’t trust the announcers, fine, I expected that. But I’d like some sense of what types of things I can look for about which I can have some knowledge. Is QB TD% a stupid stat? I’ve always thought INT% was more important even if QB rating treats them equally. Is Completion% important once you adjust for Yards/Attempt instead of Yards/Completion? Things like this could help immensely. Even knowing why certain stats are stupid would help.

To: Everyone

From: Jared

Subject: RE: the state of my football fanhood

Ah, well in that case, I would say that reading some of the general Football Outsiders stuff can be helpful. However, I'm not convinced of all their conclusions. Some things, coaches are way too conservative on fourth down, a kicker's accuracy beyond 45 yards is not consistent year to year, make a lot of sense to me. Others, like their QB theory that college completion percentage and number of collegiate games started predict success, or that 3rd down conversion % is not consistently repeatable, I'm not fully on board yet.

But with that said, a lot of what they say is definitely interesting and it's trying to make sense of the game in a logical and straightforward way.

It's hard to just give a whole bunch of things to know. But I'd bet a lot of them are things you probably already think.

Example: Establishing the run is a made up thing that announcers say. Announcers typically say something like, 'when this team runs the ball more than 30 times, they are 12-0.' Well of course they are. Any team with a lead in the 4th quarter is going to disproportionately run the ball to keep the clock running. The announcers look and see that lots of runs and a winning record are correlated. But they assume the runs lead to the victory.

Now, if the announcers talked specifically about how using those running plays are going towards setting up play action, that makes a little more sense and is something I might be inclined to believe.

In terms of specific stats, there are some that I like, and some that I don't really care about. But remember, this is all my opinion, and not necessarily right

RB - I like yards per carry, which seems pretty obvious. I think that's the best conventional stat. Football Outsiders has it's DVOA stat, which I think is better because it takes into account the result relative to the situation and other factors.

QB - I'm not a huge fan of most of the stats you mentioned. Things like completion percentage can be messed up by running a west coast offense vs. a run and gun offense. Yards per attempt is a pretty good one.

WR - Yards per catch maybe? I like FO's catch rate, which they release every year and while it's based on someone manually charting games, it seems pretty accurate to me. As an example, Jason Avant had the best hands in the league last year. If you watched all the Eagles games closely, you'd be like, 'well that's obvious, even if he does suck because he's from Michigan'

Defense is much much harder because there aren't a lot of good stats. Tackles are good? I suppose their better then not tackling the guy, but if your safeties have tons of tackles, that doesn't mean they're good, it might mean your defense sucks. Another example, interceptions. Yes, they're very very good. However, if you're Revis, maybe you're so good at covering your man that they never throw your way. Or maybe you get a lot of INTs because you gamble a lot, and you also give up a ton of big plays. I'd love to see more on defensive linemen, in particular, things like hurries and pressures/knockdowns. When you force a QB to throw, that is usually a good thing and can lead to other good things (not converting 3rd downs, interceptions). But that's not a very well kept or well publicized statistic.

In terms of underrated or overrated players. A simple rule would be that the importance of the offensive line is systematically underrated, and the defensive line is also underrated (but not nearly as much as the OL). The offensive line is the only thing that allows the offense to succeed, but it's very hard to see exactly what they're doing or understand what they're supposed to do. They also don't catch the ball, run the ball, or score touchdowns, so the announcers very rarely talk about them. If a running back is tackled behind the line of scrimmage, do we really think it's the running back's fault? On Vick's last touchdown throw last night, he did a great job of escaping the one guy who got to him, but there's a reason the other guys didn't and Vick could keep scanning the field to find Avant in the end zone. Its similar for the defensive line, particularly the tackles who don't get many sacks. People see Patterson and Bunkley without sacks and they say, 'these guys suck!,' but they don't suck, they just aren't pass rushers. But we don't have stats to measure them, and the announcers rarely care, so no one pays attention, but the line play is one of the most important things in the game and something a lot of people don't look at.

So yeah, watch the lines.

To: Everyone

From: Matt

Subject: RE: the state of my football fanhood
a lot of that stuff is definitely logical and stuff i could try to incorporate into my watching. i like the 4th down thing, the long range accuracy thing is interesting though i tend to think that there is selection bias where kickers are asked to try harder kicks in the wind and stuff based on how good they are. the college games started issue is really just a proxy for how good people thought he was when he was younger. it's not useful. it's like saying that guys with bigger signing bonuses in baseball do better. yes, but not because of that. i guess that's useful for proxies but it doesn't get at what i want to know about watching games.

the "establishing the run" thing is something i've always thought was mostly bull. i think that there is an issue with whether you keep 4-8 guys in the box, and so i'm sure that you need to be a game theorist to make the defense have to prepare for both run and pass on each place, but the number of times run is bullshit obviously. also, i've always noticed that most qb's who throw for 300 yards lost.

does DVOA value individual players? do they describe their methodology anywhere? i can never find anything on that site and i'm always left to throw up my hands and give up. it's actually designed worse than baseball prospectus' website which i thought was impossible.

the catch rate thing for WRs is interesting but...i dunno...like, how do they do it? do i just trust their numbers? i don't want to just trust numbers blindly. i'd like some sense of where they come from. i feel like there isn't much of that.

defensive stats all seem bad. that doesn't help me get into things either.

is yards/carry really the best stat for RBs? i'm always inclined to think it's based on how many really long runs you get. that's certainly useful but isn't the point of runs usually to either get a first down or to get closer to the first down marker? like, if you have a north/south back who just goes up the middle all the time, and he gets 3 yards per rush but never fumbles and rarely loses yards, i'm inclined to think that might be better than a back who averages 4 yards per rush, but that's because his rushes are divided between 18 yard rushes, no gain rushes, and 6 yard losses. like, 2/3 of the time he's unsuccessful.

is there a way to measure line play? some kind of metric of some kind?

what do football quantitative researchers know that football scouts don't know? that's my question.

i really would like to learn enough information such that i could watch a game and have some knowledge about how smart a coach's decision was or who was to credit/blame for big plays. like, who was better on the vick/jackson td to start the game? vick or jackson? or the o-line?

To: Everyone

From: Jared

Subject: RE: the state of my football fanhood

Lots of questions, some with answers, some without

- Yes Matt, they do DVOA's by player for the skill positions, they have some other metrics as well, and while I don't know how precise they are, I generally agree with their direction.

- You bring up a fantastic point about rushers, in that there's a value in consistency vs. the value of a boom or bust running back who can gain 20 yards but also lose 3. FO has talked a lot about this, and they obviously have more advanced metrics than yards per carry, I was just citing that one as the one that's on TV that I actually look at (as to say, the best of what's readily available). They (FO) have something called success rate, which gets at the point you're focused on but I don't know too much about the methodology off the top of my head

The basic question you have is what do researchers know that football scouts don't, and I don't know that there's a great answer for you. To figure out where the advantages/knowledge gaps would exist, we need to think about where data is available and where it's not. I think it's fairly safe to say that quant analysts looking at things that can be objectively measured can provide insights that go against conventional wisdom (i.e. what the 'football scouts' believe). Things like the kicking accuracy not being correlated from year to year, and that distance on kickoffs is far more consistent and a better measure of leg strength. There are stats on that, and through basic analysis you can draw a conclusion or at least a hypothesis. I think the same thing is doable on general tendencies (i.e., when to go for it on fourth), because they have complied historical data that they can look at and draw conclusions which people on coaching staffs might not have (or maybe they do, we don't really know for sure).

In terms of player analysis, I don't believe they are fundamentally better than the regular football guys. I think their stats work to show which skill players are actually delivering value, and I think those are good, but I'm not convinced they're better than the average football guy (although they may be more informed than the below-average football guy, i.e., the raiders or the redskins). But we should keep in mind the advantages football guys have over the stat guys, those that I mentioned earlier. The football guys have all the film and know much more about what plays were called and the players' intent. They also spend days and weeks and months analyzing it, which all of us can't do. Now granted, they don't build objective pieces of information into data sets for real thorough analysis (again, maybe some do, but we don't know), so my guess is a lot of it becomes the basis for 'gut' decisions, and that might make it less accurate then if you had a supercomputer doing it, but it's still an area where they possess an informational advantage.

I think a great example of where both groups collectively have no idea is in college player evaluation. NFL draft picks become busts regularly, and it's clear that teams haven't figured it out (and let's remove coaching and opportunity from the equation to simplify. Those things are obviously huge deals in player development, but let's just say that even if those were constant, there would still be lots of busts). Teams try to figure out who won't be good, and the quant analysts are trying too, but no one has convinced me that they have a good model yet. I don't know what the pro teams are up to obviously, but I'm sure they're trying to be data-driven (the 49ers have a former management consultant as one of their top guys, as an example). FO has done work there too, trying to find measures of college players that correlate with success in the pros. But that stuff is in its infancy and I don't know that I trust what's out there yet. The same problems that exist for analyzing professional football exist for college, only with 100+ teams instead of 32.

As an example of some stuff that I like reading (and one specifically related to your question about vick/jackson), I'd recommend this article from FO today. It doesn't have any stats, it's just taking certain plays and really focusing on them to see exactly what happened. You definitely won't hear this type of stuff on the broadcast, and I haven't seen it in any kind of reporting.

http://footballoutsiders.com/cover-3/2010/cover-2-career-days

It actually diagrams some plays and gets into detail. Now it's a sampling, sure, but when you read it you start to get a feel for the types of things that can be important and/or should be looked at

To: Everyone

From: Renato

Subject: RE: the state of my football fanhood

I'm really enjoying this thread. It should be published.

Local Sports Content

2010-11-18T07:41:00.000-08:00

News came out the other day that reinforces earlier stuff I've been saying about sports media content.

Comcast Joins Sporting News

Comcast Sports Group has entered into an electronic publishing deal with the Sporting News to create regional editions of Sporting News Today in the markets where Comcast has regional sports networks.

The first edition launched this week in Philadelphia.

I'm still of the mind that local sports broadcasting rights will be one of the only genres of television programming that will maintain its value to traditional advertising. The continued acceptance of, in order, DVRs, on-demand, and web-based alternatives like Hulu pretty much ensure that timeboxed viewing of shows will generally go away.

However, people still want to watch sports, and they still want to do it live as it happens.

So that content will still bring eyeballs, and for years TV players have been fighting for position to establish themselves as the dominant player in major regions.

Fox has regional networks, Comcast does as well, and it would be 100% non-shocking to see ESPN rollout regional networks as well (lord knows they have enough other ones). ESPN's already creating online portals for regional sports news, and while I think Comcast has also done it, I don't know anyone who goes there for their sports news. But this article indicates a more concerted effort to build an online complement to their TV presence.

People will keep watching sports on TV, and they'll keep watching the ads because it's an event that people want to see live as it happens (event viewing as opposed to program viewing). So TV players will keep trying to build their way into those positions to control the viewing.

But I wonder if it's all for nothing at the end of the day. There's no question that for smaller sports leagues, selling your TV rights to an established entity so that they can run production makes a ton of sense. You probably won't see an MLS network in the near future.

But for a business like the NFL, which is obsessively watched more than any other sport in the U.S., eventually they're probably going to keep it all to themselves. Some local teams already do this, like the Yankees and the Maple Leafs in Toronto (because yes, some people care about hockey!). The NFL is gradually working its way there, in establishing its own network, fighting for broad distribution, and slowly moving its games there (Thursday night football only on NFL Network!)

Pretty soon, they'll run the whole thing. But for now, the media companies will still fight to bring it to us in the interim.

Chrysler Commercial - - > A minivan for nerdy kids

2010-11-13T11:08:00.000-08:00

I don't get to see much TV, and when I do, I tend to skip the commercials. However, if I have it on at the gym while I'm on a treadmill, there's really no way to escape them regardless of how fast I run.

On a number of occasions I've seen this commercial for a Chrysler minivan. And it's a commercial that's been really really bothering me. Not because it's deceiving, and not because it's way too loud or features some other kind of crazy concepts conjured up in a Don Draper vision.

This commercial has been edited and re-dubbed in an illogical way. It makes absolutely no sense, presents us with images that cannot connect with the story being told, and I feel it implies that everyone watching it is too dumb to notice.

Here's the offending commercial, or at least part of it. I couldn't find a full clip on YouTube, maybe because Chrysler feels so guilty about thinking we're stupid that they're trying to erase it from existence:

Anyway, the beginning of the commercial has a voice over from a kid saying, 'Hey Parker, I'll race you home' Or something to that effect.

However, it's fairly obvious from the video, that kid isn't racing anybody, he's trying to get the hell away from those punks who are going to beat him up!

A more complete version of the ad shows the kid hiding behind a tree, and when he does actually throw himself into the trunk of the conveniently placed van, it's clear he's just happy to be alive.

At no point, was it a race among friends. That kid is a nerd. And those kids wanted to beat him up (which implies they're jocks, the nerds' natural enemy)

Anyway. I'm guessing someone at Chrysler with a beat up kid saw the ad and was like, 'Um, guys, this is a terrible message. Unless we're selling to the parents of kids who get their ass kicked every day'

So they changed it, but they changed it for about five cents by re-dubbing the first line and keeping the rest of the commercial as is.

Budget Truck Rental Follow Up

2010-10-31T19:14:00.000-07:00

I wanted to post a follow-up to my lengthy Budget Truck complaint.

If you can remember the details, that's amazing! It was such a long time ago.

However, if you can not remember the details, here is a quick summary.

- I reserved a rental truck for a New York to Chicago move
- I showed up to pick up the truck, and Budget informed me they had given my truck away and didn't have any more
- They didn't offer to help me in any way.
- I found a different truck company by some miracle, and got my move completed, but with significantly more money and a ton of wasted time
- I wrote an angry email to both Budget Truck customer service department and the CEO of the company
- I got a call and apology from the GM of the NYC region, and a promise that if I sent him my receipts I would get reimbursed
- I got a poorly worded/grammatically incorrect response from the Budget Truck executive office, that reminded me they make no guarantees of actually having a truck. They also gave me a small coupon for my next truck rental.

Fast forward to now, a good three months ago.

Did I get any kind of check? A sympathy card? No. I've received absolutely nothing from them.

Not that I was expecting something positive from a company like Budget Truck Rental. The company, based on my interaction with their employees and customer service representatives, is staffed by some of the laziest and most incompetent jerks on the planet.

Budget Truck sucks, their customer service sucks, and I'll never use them again.

And when I say I'll never use them again, I absolutely mean it. And not only will I not use them, I will actively persuade others to avoid them as well. If you've heard of Net Promoter Score (a corporate measure of the share of customers who actively promote you to others), well I'm the opposite. Call it a Net Destroyer Score.

So I'm going to start destroying their reputation. My blog has well over 10k hits to date. But even if I only convince one other person to avoid Budget Truck, I'll feel like I've made a difference.

Re-Attaching the Cord

2010-08-23T19:33:00.000-07:00

I've moved back to Chicago, to a new apartment, and have completely realigned my telecom portfolio.

That is to say, I've gone back to the cable companies, and am once again a TV service subscriber.

I was content to live in my apartment, relying on a fast internet connection, a netflix subscription, and a Roku streaming box. I had more than enough content.

Then I moved in with my fiancee, and discovered that if I recommended an option that left her without easy access to Say Yes to the Dress and several cities worth of Real Housewives, I would soon find myself fitted with a new pair cement shoes at the bottom of Lake Michigan.

OK, so cable it is. Welcome back into my life, Comcast. I'm assuming you've changed and are now easy to deal with, right?

What's more, we no longer subscribe to internet service.

Yes, you read that right. Me, exhibit A for any prosecution of Internet addiction, an internet subscriber no more.

What changed...did I find Jesus? (or, if not Jesus, an anti-technology version of Jesus, a Unabomber Jesus I guess)

Of course not, don't be ridiculous. We have free Wi-Fi in the building.

But the Wi-Fi has left me in something of a conundrum.

The service is adequate for basic internet. Web surfing and some light video (short clips on YouTube), that stuff's ok, but forget about anything consistent. Let's just say, if your life depended on your internet connection (think Obama receiving national security information, or me conducting my fantasy football draft), you definitely can't rely on it.

So what's an internet addict to do? Do I subscribe to a plan? Add to my already significant Comcast bill?

It's not an easy decision, in part because I love using my Roku box, and not having an internet connection turns it into a pretty lousy accessory.

The Roku allows me to stream Netflix, watch MLB.tv, YouTube, and a whole bunch of other hyper-specific and relatively useless channels.

Clearly, a more thorough analysis is required.

Reasons I would like Internet:

- Netflix streaming: For $9/month, I have access to an increasingly large library of on-demand content. Some people complain that it doesn't have the most recent movies. This is true. However, it's got tons of movies that I actually want to see and TV shows I'll always watch (e.g., Arrested Development, South Park)

- MLB.tv: For $100+, I can watch the Phillies on my big screen. Of course, Comcast has the Extra Innings package, which I think is more expensive, but quite similar. Plus, my 2010 season pass is already paid for. A sunk cost if ever there was one.

- Future Channel expansion on Roku: This is one of the more tantalizing areas. Roku continues to add channels, both officially and unofficially. Of course, they never comment on what's coming. What would be great is an NFL channel, or an NHL channel. But since this is the real world, the NFL doesn't seem willing to give up on the stupid DirecTV Sunday Ticket monopoly, and the NHL might still be too stupid to do something that would allow MORE people to watch their sport. So really, there might not be a lot here.

- Worry-free internet connections: A dedicated line would reduce frustration of disconnection/slow connections over this freaking building's Wi-Fi. That's definitely worth something, particularly if it prevents me from throwing my laptop against a wall.

But really, is that list so compelling? For an extra $40+ a month? Heck, even for $20/month?

Sadly, I don't think so. My rational MBA brain is screaming, 'That's a terrible investment! In no way is it NPV positive! (assuming the value I derive from the service as equivalent to cash inflows)

I may also put a hold on Netflix, because one DVD at a time isn't fantastic, and I can't get the streaming that I enjoy, so why waste $100+/year?

So it looks like the decision is solid. I've re-attached my cable TV cord (but still disconnected the cable internet cord...so technically, I'm still a cord cutter!)

An Unfortunate Lesson in Option Value

2010-08-21T13:28:00.000-07:00

I'm a consultant, and as a consultant, I'm also a major points-hoarder.

Doesn't matter what or where, if it's got a program that'll get me anything of value, I'm in.

Airlines, Hotels, Rental Cars...

I would register for a Red Lobster rewards program if its platinum level came with extra portions during Shrimpfest.

But my true points hoarding heart belongs to hotel programs. Starwood and Hyatt are my two chains of choice, and I constantly go back and forth like a mixed up tween choosing between Team Edward and Team Jacob (note: I know this is from Twilight, but I'm still not clear on who these people are, or why I should pay attention to vampires. I feel like it's an apt analogy nonetheless)

I'm fairly in the Starwood camp at this point, because that's what a lot of more senior consultants have told me, and the SPG Amex is a pretty good card if you don't care about the nominal annual fee.

Anyway, this is to set up the fact that I track their promotions fairly closely. Recently, Starwood offered a new one. With five stays at their hotels, you could have any one of three reward options.

Option 1 - 4,000 SPG points

Option 2 - Something like a restaurant gift certificate, I don't recall, it was a bad option

Option 3 - 25% off a points redemption at a Starwood property.

The choices were offered to you at the SPG promotion registry website, and you had a few weeks or so to make your choice. You could only choose one option, and once you made it, it was irreversible.

Now, I could have waited a while before making an award selection. I had the option to sit back until the end of the registration period, then at that time, make a choice to maximize my future reward. It was available at no additional cost, except that I would need to remember to physically register for something.

I sat there and debated in my head.

Am I really going to be in a position where I need to use points and will need the reward? I can't think of anything. Of course, I could wait, but then I might forget. The 4,000 SPG points is pretty tempting, I can always use more points and they never expire. The redemption coupon has an expiration. I kind of just want to make a decision and stop thinking about it.

So I did stop thinking about it. I picked the 4,000 points. Option to decide in the future forfeited.

Flash forward 6 weeks or so.

I'm sitting with my fiancee in our new apartment, and we're thinking about our honeymoon destination. We've settled on Hawaii, and I start to look into hotels that I can book using points.

I book one five night block at a really nice looking St. Regis in Kauai. That's a pretty hefty number of points, but it's a really nice hotel (or so I've been led to believe). Then I look to book some nights in Maui, and it hits me.

The Westin in Maui costs 12,000 points per night. You get a fifth night free with a booking, so for five nights it would come to 48,000 points.

Oh crap, I realize, that redemption coupon I passed up.

The coupon would've gotten me 25% off in points, turning it from a 48k requirement to a 36k requirement. It would've been worth 12,000 points.

Of course, I had just cashed it in for 4,000 points straight up.

Doh.

I tried to get it changed, but given my hotel-switching prowess, I had already racked up the necessary 5 stays and had already been credited with the bonus points. Even if I hadn't, the promotion specifically didn't allow any changes after a selection (because you would obviously change it to a coupon if you realized you could use it and it would be financially beneficial)

Sigh. Looks like I'll have to keep throwing the Starwood Amex around. My kingdom for another 48k SPG points.

Budget Truck Customer Service Sucks, and is also OK...

2010-08-07T14:03:00.000-07:00

So the biggest news of the month is that I've officially moved. I have left Manhattan and moved back halfway across the country to a new apartment in Chicago.

No, I didn't renounce my consulting career to run back to Chicago and become a deep dish pizza artisan. Transferring offices at the firm was actually surprisingly easy, it only took about a five minute conversation with a partner. One of the perks when you're working in a transient environment, no one really cares where you are when you're not at work.

Anyway, I needed to move all the stuff from my apartment out to Chicago. Seemed simple enough. I went on Budget Truck rental, who had a location in Manhattan, and booked a one-way rental to Chicago for a Friday pickup at noon. I did this a few weeks before my move, got my confirmation, and was all set.

In the weeks leading up to the move, I started to line up all the other logistical details. I began packing boxes, I arranged for the elevator with my super, I cleared the move day as vacation with my project team, I even got my brother to come up from Philadelphia to help me load the thing.

Everything was all set, just needed to take the subway up to Midtown and pick it up.

I found the lot easily enough, it was the one with a couple trucks sitting around.

My brother and I went inside the office and up to the counter. There was a woman in front of us renting a truck.

I waited patiently while the woman finished up her forms, went outside with the agent and got in a large truck, driving off.

As she departed, the agent came back in the office and I gave him my credit card and license.

He took my stuff and worked at his desk. He worked for a while. Too long, it seemed.

Finally, he came to a realization.

"Oh, I was supposed to hold the 15 foot truck for you"

I wasn't sure exactly what he meant, but I suspected the worst. The clerk then confirmed the worst.

"That woman had reserved a van, and we gave her the truck being held for your reservation"

I quickly thought of Seinfeld, and that I was in a bizarre cosmic rerun of that scene.

I tried to remain calm, explaining that they needed to find me another truck.

We don't have any other trucks

What about those in the lot???

Those are all broken down

What about two smaller trucks???

That was our last one

This round of dialogue went on for a while, me asking how I could get a truck, the clerk explaining why I couldn't.

Needless to say, it was seriously screwing up my plan.

My brother and I quickly put backup plans into action. He called UHaul, I called Penske. Our prospects seemed dim, as it was a hugely popular period for moving.

The Penske woman even laughed when I asked her for an immediate reservation. However, we were in luck, as one office had just gotten a 15 foot truck back and had it available.

Of course, it was in Brooklyn.

So I ended up having to take a couple trains over to Brooklyn and pick up the truck. Not only was it more expensive, but it set us back a couple hours that ensured we left Manhattan for our drive right in the teeth of Friday afternoon rush hour.

Needless to say, when I got to Chicago, I wanted to make sure Budget knew what had happened.

So I looked up their customer service email address (as well as their CEOs), and wrote them a polite but firm email.

They responded, but they responded twice and in wildly different fashion.

The next day, I had a voicemail from the General Manager for the New York area. I connected with him the next day, and he was very apologetic. He agreed that it was completely unacceptable, and that if I would send them a copy of my Penske receipt, they would reimburse me for the difference between it and my Budget reservation. I thought that was fair.

I haven't gotten a check yet, but I'm assuming I will. Anyway, I thought the case was closed at that point. But then I got an email. Two emails actually. Both from the 'Budget Truck Customer Service Executive Response Team.'

Sounded serious, like a crack SWAT team of Indian call center workers. Maybe it's a team of experts, each with a different specialty like an action movie. There's a pilot, a strongman, maybe a smooth talker. That actually is most of the A-Team, but you get the idea.

Then I read their email. Wow.

Budget Truck takes seriously it’s commitment to have the rental truck our customers reserved available for them at the time and locations it’s reserved at. Unfortunately, there are instances when there may be an unexpected vehicle maintenance issue or the previous customer’s plans change causing them to keep the truck longer or drop off at a different location. This is the reason we do not guarantee a specific size, time, or location as specified on our terms & conditions which are accessible on our webpage.

As you stated, the end of the month is a very busy time for moving and trucks are in short supply.

We will also send you via email and apology letter with coupons you can use with a Budget Truck or Budget Car.

We do apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you.

Sincerely

EC
Budget Truck
Executive Desk

I'm still blown away by the content of that message. They may as well have told me to go screw myself. Allow me to summarize...

1. Sucks to be you
2. We never promised you a truck at a time and place, we promised you some kind of vehicle at some point in the future, potentially
3. Here are coupons, because we know you're anxious to use us again.

I'm not even going to talk about the grammar errors in the email. Of course, the next email was also there to distract me from playing language police.

The next email had the subject line

BTR (APOL) Standard CS Apology Letter.xls

The content, was an excel file, that had a little text. The most salient part was the section where they asked me to accept their apologies for any inconvenience I may have experienced due to inventory delay.

Is inventory delay the technical term for 'Your idiot clerk gave my truck away to someone else' ?

Anyway, they also gave me a couple coupons in the attachment.

- 15% off my next Budget Truck rental
- Up to 25% off a Budget car rental

Note: Coupons expire 12 months from the date of the letter

So in the event that I need to move again in a year, and want to take a Budget truck again, I'll get 15% off, which falls somewhere between a AAA discount and a mark down the clerk will give you if you show some cleavage.

In short, the Budget manager seemed like a reasonable guy, but their 'Executive Response Team' is borderline absurd.

Rest assured, I won't be using Budget Truck again. Get bent Budget Truck.

Just a lonely caveman

2010-07-17T18:13:00.000-07:00

It finally happened. A terrifying ordeal that left me numb with loss and near tears. A shell of myself. I should have known something would go wrong. I should have known the potential for casualties and collateral damage was high.

:::cue flashback:::

It was one of the more challenging travel days I had ever planned for myself. The end of a vacation abroad with nothing but a few hours until a new project.

An eight hour flight back from Amsterdam into Newark, NJ, then after a brief stopover to exchange laundry for fresh work clothes, a trip out to LGA for a flight to Chicago and the beginning of a new project.

It was supposed to be simple. No one was supposed to get hurt.

Sure there were signs things were going to go wrong. A few black clouds that, at the time, looked like nothing more than random circumstance.

Checking out of my Amsterdam hotel in the morning, the shuttle I booked took off without me while I waited for it in the lobby. Unfortunate.

A pre-flight lunch at the airport which included a giant splotch of ketchup on my shirt, the last clean one in the bag. Bad luck perhaps, or maybe just a case of a poorly handled sandwich

The flight from Amsterdam was on time, a good sign. Of course, eight hours spent in the middle seat with nothing on the in-flight movie but the romantic comedy, Valentine's Day, seemed like something designed for a sitcom laugh track.

But I was fine. I was making good time. A breeze through customs, a train, a different train, a subway, and a bus later I was back at my place with a freshly packed bag.

Plenty of time to get to LGA. Nothing to worry about. No reason to suspect the sword perilously dangling above my head, about to drop.

I hopped in a cab, and as the driver took off, he asked if I had cash for the fare.

As a work expense, I put them on my corporate card, for the ease of reimbursement. Plus, I just got back in the country and didn't have a ton of U.S. cash. I didn't think he would take my Euros, so I didn't bother asking.

Take another cab, the driver told me.

Frustrated, a clambered out of the cab, got my bag from the trunk and hailed another.

As I got in and the cab began it's journey, I noticed it.

A suspicious absence in my front pocket.

My wallet was there, as were my headphones...

but where...where was my iPhone?

I checked my pockets...I checked my backpack...the floor of the cab...the depths of a cab seat cushions...

Nothing...

My shirt collar was getting tighter...my pulse quickening.

It must have fallen out of my pocket when the cab with the faulty card reader booted me out.

I did my best to avoid a complete heart attack. My phone was password protected, but it had all my information. Not only that, it was my anchor to life! My news, my sports, my link to family and friends! When you spent you're life in airports, hotels, and conference rooms, your cell phone is more than a communications device, it's what keeps you alive!

And mine was riding away in some other cab with a busted credit card machine.

I tried to figure out a plan. We had already lost sight of the cab (although that would have given me the best excuse to yell, 'Follow that car!' Which I've always wanted to do)

I borrowed the cab driver's cell phone and dialed. No answer. I text'd a message to the phone with my address and the promise of a reward,a figuring it would pop up on the phone. No response. I called a second time, and a third.

Nothing. It was ringing, but those desperate calls went unanswered.

When I arrived at the airport, I knew I needed to keep up the search. If that phone wasn't found in the first 12-24 hours, I'd probably lose it forever. I'd lose it to the streets. If I didn't find it, who knows where it could end up! Alone and scared, maybe in the gutter, turning trick phone calls for a nickel a minute?!?

I booted up the laptop and sent out a distress signal to the family. If everyone called the number over the course of the night, someone would have to eventually notice it.

But when I landed in Chicago, no one had gotten a response.

I kept up the campaign late into the night and even early the next morning. But by the next morning, my calls were not met with rings, only a direct link to my voicemail.

My phone was off, and with it, likely any chance at recovery.

That was Sunday, and since then, I've been without a phone. Without remote email. Without my anchor.

Oh sure, I ordered a new one. But each new phone takes between 7-14 days to get processed.

And so I sit. Alone.

Some people would call that liberating. They'd say that freedom from the shackles of a modern cell phone would allow me to clear my head.

Those people are stupid.

I know that the access and processing of new information triggers the release of dopamine (or so I think I read). And sure, that's probably what's turned me into a complete info-zombie. Craving more and more data at all times. It's why I have a hard time watching a movie without a laptop, or taking the train without a podcast on my headphones.

Yes, I'm a complete information addict. And now, with no remote source of data, I'm just a stumbling junkie in withdrawal, wandering the streets looking for a data fix. I grew desperate, begging, even bargaining with strangers. I tried to trade my apartment for a list of the most blogged New York Times articles!

But there were no takers. So I'm still back in the stone age.

Just a lonely caveman in a crazy modern world.

A Tight Ship, Indeed

2010-06-29T05:57:00.000-07:00

Longer posts are on their way, believe me, I have a couple on my to-do list. But really quickly, I got the following email today from our HR organization.

Now remember, I've been working here for almost a full year, and have lived in the same place the entire time. However, I had a different address when I was an intern, and getting my HR-related documents (most notably, a health insurance card) to the right place has been problematic.

From: HR@XXXXXXXXXXX.com
Subject: Address Change Notificaton

06/29/2010

Memo: Address Change Request
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
RE: Change of address request

Dear XXXXXXXXX,

This memo is to inform you that your change of address request was updated in our system.

The following address is now in our records:

Effective Date: 10/07/2009 10:38:05 am
XXX East 12th Street
Apt XXX
New York, NY 10003

If this address is incorrect please contact your local Human Capital Representative

Sincerely,

Human Resources

I think there should be some kind of absurdity filter for these emails that says, 'Wait, it's June and we're just processing this request from October?'

A weird feeling

2010-06-23T16:05:00.000-07:00

It's been a strange couple of weeks for me at the good old consulting firm.

One recent Friday, the week before our series of final meetins with our current client's project, I got a strange call. I was being rolled off the project, effective the following Monday.

It seemed a little odd to me. Not only because we still had the final presentations to do, but also because it didn't seem like it was very much notice. There was no chance I'd be picked up by another project, and thus, I would have my first ever time on 'the beach'

In consulting speak, 'the beach' is something of a fairy tale magical land, where you aren't officially working on a project. There's no crazy travel plans to make, no hotels, and no working until 4am (usually).

Of course, like any fairy tale magical land, it's also quite toxic if exposed for too long. And by toxic, I mean you get booted off if you are on 'the beach' for too long (which makes sense because you aren't earning the company any money).

So I wasn't going to be traveling, and I would be back in New York. By mid-afternoon on Monday, I was assigned to help out on my first proposal, a manufacturing-focused effort to a consumer products company.

I actually found it really interesting. I got to research a completely new industry, uncover industry trends, develop broad strategic hypotheses...all while sleeping in my own bed (I also snuck in a movie one night).

Of course, it couldn't last forever (and if I want to afford to eat, it shouldn't), and by this past Monday I was staffed up again. For the next two weeks I'm learning a lot about the steel industry, which will conveniently take me right up to the 4th of July, and my first long vacation since I started.

It's already started to feel weird to not have to be working all the time. I wonder if I'll go crazy when I'm on vacation and completely unplugged.

The Coming Sports Diaspora

2010-06-10T17:56:00.000-07:00

Ugh. It has not been the best of days today.

I'm sitting at the airport, waiting for a flight that's been delayed for two hours, this after working until 3am last night.

Oh, and by the way, the Flyers lost in the Stanley Cup finals in a game that I had to listen to with one earphone while simultaneously working on a presentation.

At least I missed what turned out to be a big disappointment.

The Stanley Cup finals were notable, not just because it gave the Flyers their first chance to win the cup in over 30 years (which they blew because they're goalie is very below average, but that's an aside), but because it pitted the Flyers, from my native Philadelphia, against Chicago, my soon-to-be full time residence and the home of my fiancee.

It definitely made for an interesting dynamic, one that I'd just as soon avoid in future championship games (unless the Philadelphia team is going to win).

But it raises an interesting question. Let's fast forward some medium to large number of years, and let's assume we have at least one kid and live in the Chicagoland area.

What team does our kid root for??? And this doesn't apply just to hockey. Football. Baseball. College sports. Who will be their favorite player growing up? What's the first jersey they'll wear? And who are they going to side with when Australia plays Pakistan in cricket???

OK, so cricket will be a non-issue. But the sports rooting interest is a very real issue.

Of course, for our generation, this wasn't that much of a decision. Thanks to more primitive technology, it was much harder for someone like my dad (a Massachusetts native) to follow his Boston teams upon moving to Philadelphia. It became even harder to indoctrinate his kids into similar likings. As such, not only did my dad become a Philadelphia fan, but one of his kids (hint: me) grew up into an all-time great Patriots hater.

But now, the tables have turned. Now you can get just about any sports game in the comfort of your own home. Expanded national sports coverage, premium sports packages, streaming sports radio on the internet, and internet versions of local-area papers make it extremely easy to follow your teams wherever you live.

So following your own team after you move becomes pretty darn easy. Which means brainwashing your kids into liking your teams should be pretty darn easy too (note: this may be the first time I ever make a ridiculous assumption about what I'll be able to force my kids to do. I'm sure it won't be the last)

Now there's a risk involved, and it's the risk of raising a kid who becomes a social pariah for liking the wrong team at school. To that point, I'd simply shrug my shoulders and say, 'If my kid is anything like me he'll be overweight, so they'll have bigger things to worry about anyway'

Of course there's one other issue. That whole thing about my fiancee being a Chicago sports fan. Apparently her opinion counts too, or so I read in the 'Unfortunately, your fiancee will start being right all the time' pamphlet they hand out when you buy engagement rings.

But she's a reasonable person (or at least doing a great job of faking it so far). So let's go down the list and figure out what teams will win out.

Hockey: Flyers vs. Blackhawks

Now, this one is still a little raw since it's been less than 24 hours since the Flyers' goalie threw a big pile of garbage on his reputation.

However, this one is non-negotiable. I've been going to Flyers games since I was born. I've got jerseys, I've t-shirts, I've caught pucks at games.

Even after watching the finals, I'm still not sure my fiancee knows what Icing is.

Winner - Flyers

College Basketball: Illinois Illini vs. Penn State Nittany Lions

Another slam dunk, pardoning the basketball reference. College basketball is a big deal to the Illinois crowd, they have chants and everything. They also wear orange, which appeals to me as a Flyers fan.

Penn State does technically have a basketball team. I may have played for it while I went there, I'm still not sure.

Winner - Illinois

Professional Football: Bears vs. Eagles

Another major rooting interest for me. Over the past few years the Eagles standing in my mental hierarchy of sports teams has improved, mostly due to the fact that football is by far the easiest sport to follow consistently. It's one game a week, rather than hockey's 3 or baseball's 7. So much easier to watch every game.

And given that it's a naturally violent sport that's confusing for novices, I'm hoping my fiancee doesn't care at all. She likes to do other things on Sunday besides watch sports on TV, which also gives me control of what football we display in the house.

And if you thought I wasn't going to raise my little kid to yell out E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES! and hurl batteries at opposing players, you were kidding yourself.

Winner - Eagles

At this point, it's becoming clear to me that when I care even a little about the sport, I'm going to push my team. And when I don't care about the sport at all, I'll let my kid root for anyone.

So with that, let's quickly ensure some Chicago balance huh?

Professional Soccer: Fire vs. Union

There's a Philadelphia soccer team? And it's called the Union??? No thank you.

Winner - Fire

Professional Basketball: 76ers vs. Bulls

This might be close if the 76ers still had Dr. J. But apparently that was like 25 years ago.

The Sixers have been terrible most of my life, and I also don't really like professional basketball as a sport.

The Bulls might get LeBron James. So hell, even I might start rooting for them anyway

Winner - Bulls

I wish I could stack this deck a little more, but I don't know if either city has a WNBA team, and I think Arena football may be defunct? World Team Tennis???

Meh. It's about even right? Moving on.

College Football: Illinois Illini vs. Penn State Nittany Lions

Another college matchup, but this time the roles are reversed as my alma mater believes in football. I'm not sure Illinois cares, although they do win points for having a native american mascot. I like mascots that can potentially be offensive.

Penn State is also one of the winningest football teams in all of college. They have Joe Paterno, and they've got tons of cute kids merchandise. You can dress your kid up as a lion, you definitely can't dress him up as an Indian (well, you could, but I think it's weirder)

Winner - Penn State

Baseball: Phillies vs. ~~Cubs~~ White Sox

The last big enchilada actually gets pretty easy. It would be one thing if my fiancee was a Cubs fan (and by Cubs fan, I don't mean one of those fake Chicago Cubs fans that defines 'fan' as hanging out and getting drunk in Wrigleyville). National league opponents would make for a potential rooting conflict. But given that she's an American league girl and I'm a National league guy, there should be room to co-exist.

Our kid should be able to root for both teams with little risk of disaster. But just in case a White Sox - Phillies world series is in the cards. I'm going to indoctrinate for the Phils anyway

Delayed Vacation Story About a Potential Vacation Delay

2010-05-22T18:33:00.000-07:00

This story has been long overdue for a blog post, but now that I finally have some time over a weekend and the Phillies game is blacked out on my Roku box, I can write up the details behind my crazy trip to Scottsdale.

It wasn't Scottsdale itself that provided the adventure, but the relatively short distance between the western Massachusetts suburb where I am currently working, and Logan airport in Boston.

A distance of less than 35 miles, but one that nearly killed me...

:::Fade to story intro:::

I was working on an assignment for a technology company, and the project had been extremely busy. Late nights, little sleep, and crappy late night meals collectively wore me down. But with each successive night, I was getting closer and closer to my vacation.

Thursday and Friday off, leaving Wednesday night for Scottsdale Arizona, where I would meet up with my fiancee for a relaxing stay at a nice looking Hyatt resort. It seemed like a great place to take my first vacation since starting with the firm in September, and to say I was looking forward to it was an understatement.

Every day, in talking to my fiancee, we would count down the days until vacation.

Yes, there was nothing I was looking forward to more than that Wednesday night flight out west, away from late night emails, rapidly changing project scopes, and my stupid laptop (of course, I wasn't going to physically go away from my laptop, that had to come with me, but metaphorically speaking).

And every time I would speak to my fiancee, and we talked about vacation, I would talk about how there was no way in hell I would miss my flight from Boston, which I needed to make in order to connect in Newark, NJ and make my flight to Phoenix.

Wednesday started out typically enough. My flight was at 4:40 in the afternoon, and I had planned to leave the office at 3:00. No problem, right?

Then I got asked to go to a meeting at 2:30. In a different building then where we were based. Half hour meeting on the calendar, plus a roughly 15 minute drive away.

OK, still not so bad, only moderately inconvenient.

I go to the meeting, taking a member of the client team with me.

We go, talk a bit, and get the heck out of there only slightly late. The client knows my vacation plan, and understands that I need to leave.

I get back to the office a little before 3:30pm, with the intention of ducking in, grabbing my laptop and bag, and peacing out.

Of course, that's when the project manager decides to start talking about a part of the project that until now, has been largely ignored. Lots of questions...questions without easy answers...answers that certainly won't be figured out in the next 5 minutes...

And yet, more follow-up questions...

Now, there are four of us in the room. My project manager, another associate, and a client. The client and other associate know I need to leave ASAP, and I can feel their empathy as they watch me struggle to end the conversation as quickly as possible. It's not like my project manager didn't know my vacation plans either...but he didn't seem concerned that I would miss my flight

"One word answers, one word answers," I thought to myself over and over.

"Just agree to do whatever he says when you get back and get the heck out of here"

"Wow, why is this taking so long?"

I just kept agreeing and agreeing as I packed up all my stuff to serve as a visual indication that I had to leave. I didn't even know what I was agreeing to at that point. It's possible that when our first kid is born I'll have to turn him/her over to my firm, that's how little I was focusing on the conversation and how much I was focusing on getting out of there.

Finally, my manager relents. I can tell he's not happy or he thinks I'm an idiot, or some combination of the two. But I booked this trip months ago, everyone knew it, and there was no way I was missing it (Because if I had missed this trip for anything work related, not only would I have been furious, but my fiancee would have taken a flamethrower to my office)

So at this point, it's around 3:40ish and I'm hustling out the door into the parking lot.

"OK, OK...this is totally do-able. It's the middle of the day, it's ~30 miles away...no problem...I can do this"

I get in the car (actually my project manager's rental) and speed through the parking lot on my way to Route 495...Now, I need to be on route 495 for maybe a couple miles, just long enough to reach the Massachusetts turnpike, make a right, and speed off to freedom...

I pull onto the highway, and run smack into bumper to bumper traffic.

Holy sh*tballs

That's actually a much more cleaned up version of what I actually said. I swore so much and so hard I think I scared some of the nearby cars.

I couldn't afford any traffic, I didn't have any time, and here I was sitting in stone cold gridlock.

For a good 5 minutes, I freaked out beyond all possible freakouts.

I did everything I could think of in those two minutes. First I looked on google maps to see if there were any alternatives...but I only needed to go 2 miles...of course there were no alternatives.

I pulled up Kayak on my iphone and started to price a new plane ticket. The best I would be able to do was a later flight that would get me in in the wee hours of Thursday morning and cost over $600.

"Let's try to avoid that" I thought, looking out over the sea of cars that may as well have been in park.

I sat...and stewed...and sat...and stewed.

I couldn't believe I was going to miss my flight, as precious seconds ticked away... I promised my fiancee I wouldn't screw it up...I swore to her that I'd make my flight come hell or highwater, and here I was screwing it up.

To say I was mad as hell would be an understatement.

And then I came to a realization...there was a perfectly good shoulder on this highway!

But wait, that presents an ethical dilemma. The shoulder is meant for breakdown purposes only, to be used for disabled vehicles and emergency access. It is not meant for traditional driving. On the other hand, wasn't this an emergency? Didn't I need emergency access?!?

I slowly but surely merged my way over from the left lane to the right lane. I glanced around nervously, took a deep breath, and gunned my project manager's rental SUV right into the breakdown lane.

I flew down the lane, passing dozens and dozens of trapped cars. At first I tried to pretend like I was just someone trying to angle for a better view of what was up ahead, but after a few seconds ditched all that and hurried down the highway for my exit.

And as I rounded a corner, I saw in the distance traffic starting to break up. It had only been a couple of miles, but something was blocking much of the road. I approached the blockage, negotiating my way back into traffic when I saw police flashers up ahead.

There had been a relatively serious accident, with a car still overturned, blocking two lanes.

I couldn't contain my jubilation as I passed the accident, and sped forward on a now empty freeway.

But I was still racing against the clock, without much time to make it the ~25 or so miles down the turnpike.

At that point, I turned into some combination between a NASCAR driver and a soccer mom on amphetamines.

There was no time for speed limits, and no time for other cars, this was an emergency!

I weaved in and out of traffic, flying at every opportunity (but never in a really unsafe fashion! relax mom!)

I would alternate between checking the clock, checking to make sure I was under 90 mph, and watching the road to plot my next passing attack.

I was actually doing ok, but still very much behind schedule...I needed to get faster

And then, I hit my first toll booth.

Now, since I've been on the project, I've rented several cars. And each time, I've paid the extra $2.50 for an EZ pass, so I can pass through all the turnpike tolls without having to wait a few minutes each time and worry about cash and receipts and such.

My project manager, did not believe in the EZ Pass (which honestly, is ridiculous. We typically wait at two toll booths each day, and four on our way to and from the airport. If each one takes 5 minutes, that's at least an hour a week of our time. And last time I checked, we bill at a rate of more than $2.50 an hour. But I digress.)

I got to my first toll booth, and without an EZ Pass, my heart sank as I settled into the long line of cars for the cash only lane (or as I usually refer to it, the 'stone-age moron lane for people who fear technology')

I waited, and waited, looking nervously at the dashboard clock.

The line was barely moving, and I was running out of time...

"This is an emergency!" I yelled to myself in self-serving rationalization, as I veered out of the cash only lane, gunned the engine, and blasted through the EZ Pass lane.

I kept speeding, when I came to another toll booth.

"EMERGENCY!!!" I yelled again, as I floored my project manager's rental car through the EZ Pass lane

Further down the road, yet another toll booth (what the hell Massachusetts?)

One more time, "EMERGENCY!"

It started to get a little fun actually (in hindsight, not quite as much fun since I discovered the fine for an EZ Pass violation is $50).

But I persisted, I had to make this flight...as I approached Logan airport with about 25 minutes before my flight was scheduled to depart (yes, depart, not board)

I weaved around traffic and broke a couple minor laws in the airport to get to the rental car facility.

I hopped out of the car, grabbing my laptop bag and suitcase out of the trunk.

The rental car guy approached my car to check me back in, but I took off for the shuttle to the terminal.

"I don't have time! E-mail me the receipt!!!" as I ran for a bus I hoped had a leadfoot driver

I jumped on the bus, for what was definitely a foreign driver.

"I have a flight in 20 minutes!" I told him

"OK, we leave now" he responded.

I was flying Continental, which luckily enough was the first terminal on our stop.

As we approached, I got everything ready for what would have to be the quickest security line ever. I had already checked in online, and was using a mobile boarding pass on my phone. I needed it to work too, because I had no time to print another one out. I also got out my ID, and put any metal I had in my laptop bag.

We got to the terminal, and I flew out of the bus, running up the escalator to the security check point. I quickly checked for my gate and rushed towards the lines.

"First class" a security agent said pointing to his left. "Or coach," as he then pointed to his right.

I needed help, I was so late.

"My flight leaves in 10 minutes," I said, trying my best to sound exasperated, "Is there anything you can do?"

He blinked.

"First class," he repeated the point to his left. "Or coach" again pointing to his right.

Not that this is breaking any new information, but TSA agents are dicks.

I got in the coach security line, and saw that I had 10 minutes and about 10 people to go.

I got myself fully prepared (laptop out, liquids bag out, shoes untied) and tried to assess my odds. I would be fine if everyone could just get through smoothly.

A minute later, and I hadn't moved an inch. At that point, an announcement came over the PA system, "Final boarding call for Continental flight 481 to Newark"

Oh crap.

I knew I had come too far to give up now, and I just brazenly walked to the front of the line and begged others to let me through because my flight was in final boarding (I begged as I put my stuff on the conveyor, so I didn't give them much of a choice, but as I've been saying, it was an emergency)

I stuffed my luggage through the metal detector, threw my shoes on (no time for tying!), grabbed my laptop in one hand and my roller bag suitcase in the other. I balanced my liquid bag on top of the computer, and took off sprinting for the gate.

I saw the gate in front of me. The door was still open!

I got up to the counter...the gate agent looked at what I mess I was.

"Don't worry, you made it!"

But What if You Know that they Know that you Know?

2010-04-23T13:31:00.000-07:00

Saw an interesting article in the WSJ yesterday, enough that I thought it warranted a quick entry (also because I'm on a bus back home and would rather do this than another 10 minutes of work)

The article details an investigation into potential price fixing between two airlines, Virgin and Cathay Pacific on their UK - Hong Kong route. Basically, they're being investigated to see if they're conspiring to fix prices at a higher level than the normal market clearing rate.

Ok, so that's not necessarily so interesting. They just made a movie about one of the biggest price fixing cases in corporate history (Matt Damon in the Informant!). But judging by the people that went to see it, even that wasn't interesting.

However, this little piece of the article caught my eye.

The OFT (ed: Authority) alleged that through contacts between employees over a number of years, the airlines coordinated strategies on passenger fares through the exchange of sensitive information about pricing and other commercial matters.

The OFT said the matter was brought to its attention by Cathay Pacific under the watchdog's leniency policy, where a company that is the first to report its participation in cartel conduct may qualify for immunity from penalties. Provided it continues to cooperate, the Hong Kong carrier will be immune from any penalty imposed in this case, the OFT added.

What the what?

I find this fascinating.

Basically, if you collude with your competition to screw over your customers, you can get off free if you just rat out your collaborators.

So, which is more ideal for a company???

A) Don't price fix, and avoid risk of penalty, but avoid price fixing profits

B) Price fix, cooperate indefinitely, expose yourself to risk of discovery/penalty and enjoy the benefits of price fixing (important note: along with your competition)

or...

C) Engage in price fixing, enjoy benefits of price fixing for a certain time, and rat out your competition so that they are penalized, but earning immunity from prosecution in the process

You could basically turn your corporation into some kind of super secret double agent, ratting our the evil price fixer for the good of the little guy consumer (note: no one would believe this story in a million years, but the CEO could walk around to the James Bond theme in his/her office and feel cool I guess)

You'd also get the additional profits from screwing the market over, while avoiding penalties that would hurt your competitor.

So why are there not more companies price fixing and turning themselves in???

Alternatives (with my real answer at the bottom):

1 - Corporations play by the rules and don't price fix unless their run by evil super villains (Probability: Extremely Low)

2 - Corporations do price fix, but are so fiendishly evil that they collude without a problem, despite the apparent incentive to deviate (Probability: Low)

3 - If this were a one-shot game, everyone would rat everyone out, right? If the world were to end after one year, and you were trying to make as much profit for your airline before the world ends (note: you'd be a loser, go hang out with your kids!), you would sure rat out your collaborator and expose them to penalties that could help you (e.g., loss of airline route access, financial penalty, etc.). However, this is not a one-shot game, as corporations are designed to outlive all of us.

Thus, an uneasy truce among price fixers, right?

I guess maybe Cathay Pacific thinks the world is about to end...or they just don't care about pissing Virgin off...either way, it's not good for Richard Branson.

But he's a super billionaire, so I'd guess he's cool with it.

New Developments

2010-03-21T10:03:00.000-07:00

It's been a while since the blog got a good update. It's also been a while since I thought of a new way to open each post. I'll leave that challenge for later, but for now, I'm super busy with a whole bunch of major life changes.

First and foremost, I'm almost finished my current project. These last two months I've been commuting out to Rochester for more work in the health insurance industry. Together with my previous project, that means I've been in the industry since November. I'm not sure what my future holds, but it may be time for a change?

Of course, I might not survive the end of my project if my significant other reads this. Because in reality, the project news is completely irrelevant and insignificant to the news that we got engaged last week.

Talk about burying the lead.

After almost two years together, I got engaged to my now fiancee, and in keeping with the tradition of our relationship, she was very surprised.

Getting engaged means a whole bunch of big things coming, including talk of apartments, office transfers, and wedding planning. Fortunately, I think I'll only tangentially be involved in all of that. I just need to show up where I'm told, which is fine by me.

But I'm getting ahead of myself, because I still haven't gone through the engagement etc.

Let's start with actually buying the ring, which had to pre-date all this engagement stuff.

I had had several discussions with my girlfriend about rings. It's a major purchase that, in my view, could either be made with absolutely no guidance, or absolutely lots and lots of guidance from the eventual recipient.

To me, it was a no-brainer...ask her what she likes.

Of course, it doesn't help at all when she has no idea what she likes. None whatsoever.

Apparently, all those times when her friends showed off her rings, my girlfriend managed to recall nary a detail about what worked and what didn't.

What shaped diamond do you like?

I don't know, maybe round, maybe square, maybe something else?

Hmm...ok, well what about the band?

Kind of thin maybe? Maybe with more diamonds on it???

That's something I guess. What about size?

Big

That was the only thing she was sure about, that it should be big. That also led to about a million inappropriate 'that's what she said' jokes over the past few months.

So with almost no opinions from the girlfriend, we thought it would make sense to go through a store or two and take a look. Maybe she would be inspired.

Of course, there's a Tiffany's a couple blocks from her place, and at one point, we decided to go in and take a look.

Here's my first bit of advice for anyone planning on engagement ring shopping with your girlfriend. Do not, under any circumstances, go into a Tiffany's. Don't even think about it, even as a lark. Even if she says she knows it's ridiculous and no one should ever buy something there, she is 100% lying to you. She will see a giant ring there, and she will want it and secretly hope for it even if it costs a billion jillion dollars. It will take months of lowering expectations to undo the damage, although the ultimate psychological impact has yet to be fully researched. So yeah, don't go there.

After that and other, similar experiences, I had a good idea of what she was in the market for, and a good idea of what I could reasonably expect to spend.

Then I actually had to purchase the ring itself, which was fairly anti-climactic.

I met (secretly) with a jeweler in Philadelphia, with my parents in tow (of course, who am I kidding, my mom knows this stuff, so she did most of the talking). The jeweler took out a small envelope with a series of diamonds in it.

Each one was placed on the counter in the small upstairs office tucked away from all the huge diamond signs advertising other jewelers on the block. We went through each one, its report from the authority thing over diamonds (GIA? something like that...something that creates official looking reports anyway), and analyzed each with a magnifying glass.

Honestly, it's pretty amazing the imperfections that you can't see with the naked eye but are as clear as day under the scope. It's also pretty amazing that when you're looking at a diamond with some smudges deep inside you are able to say, 'Yes, that imperfect jewel is good enough for the girl I want to marry because I don't think she'll notice!'

For the record, I did not say this. And further, there are no smudges in her diamond. And lastly, if you try to take a magnifying glass to her ring, I will cut you down like a furious ninja.

So I had the ring (thanks mostly to Uncle Sam for his extremely generous tax refund), and needed to actually propose.

I had my idea of how I wanted to do it, and much to everyone's dismay, it did not involve a skywriter or a jumbotron. My actual plan was pretty simple, proposing in front of the place where we had our first date. I also wanted to get her family involved, because she always talked about how she wanted to be able to share the news with them whenever it happened.

I was in Chicago, working out of our firm's office there, when I emailed the girlfriend and told her I made a reservation at an Italian place downtown. She initially resisted, arguing that we didn't need to go out, but I persisted and she quickly acquiesced.

Now, she thought I had made a reservation at this Italian place, one where we had eaten before, but in reality, I had made a reservation across the street, at our first-date spot.

In other words, the trap was set. (We'll see how many more times I can refer to the engagement/wedding as a 'trap' before my fiancee tosses a hair dryer into my shower)

Her family was already in the know, and were included on the reservation. I had spoken to her father earlier that week, and they were going to be there with their two sons to celebrate (assuming she said yes, obviously).

You could say we were all in cahoots, and since I enjoy that word, I will say it. We were in cahoots. Ca-hoots.

Sorry, back on message.

Both the girlfriend and I got home from work, and I did my best to exude casualness, as if nothing were out of the ordinary.

Even when my girlfriend mentioned that she looked like a mess, I didn't caution her to put herself together...didn't want to tip her off. She can look nice the next time she gets engaged.

But we walked together from her place towards the restaurant, and as we crossed in front of the place where we met, I stopped her.

It took a good five seconds for me to actually get into my talking points (she'll love that I referred to them as talking points too). I think I got as far as the first 'love,' when she realized something fishy was going on.

I'm not sure she heard anything I said for the next two minutes, because all she could do was appear shocked and question whether it was real.

She also did not cry, so whoever had 'No tears during proposal' at 20-1 got paid off huge.

Of course, the problem with her whole 'shock and awe' routine, was that...

a) she didn't even look at the ring for like the first minute I held it up for her. I spent so much time and effort finding the one I wanted, I really wanted to get a reaction and what does she do? Look everywhere except the blue ring box.

b) she didn't seem to understand that she had to give me a response. Now maybe she just assumed the response was implied in her reaction, but she left me hanging for a good long while. There weren't a lot of people walking in front of the restaurant (and they hadn't opened outdoor seating yet, thank god), but at least one guy in a car stopped at a red light got impatient. "Just say yes!" he yelled out to her.

Eventually, she did...although it wasn't really audible to humans. I heard a high pitched 'Y', and then it went into a different octave that I'm sure only dogs, predatory birds, and a specific set of crustaceans can understand.

The crab people were excited for us I'm sure.

We continued the celebration with her family, who were waiting inside, as well as with several friends who heard the news and descended on the restaurant like the freaking Minutemen. If we ever get invaded by England again, I want all those girls on the first-call list, because they swarm like crazy.

So yeah, that's an abridged version of the story. We're hard at work making lists, brainstorming, and identifying venues that will suit our needs (it's hard to find a big ballroom that can support both a great cocktail hour and a full castle-style moonbounce)

But I'm sure there's more to come on that front. And regardless of the stress this whole planning mess will probably cause, we're both very happy and excited, and we're sure it's going to be great.

Travel Misadventures

2010-02-25T15:47:00.000-08:00

This is a blog post live from the back of a regional train car. While my project has been based in Rochester, NY...and while my apartment is in New York, NY...and while my girlfriend lives in Chicago, IL.

This train is beginning and ending its journey from an entirely different set of cities.

I'm bound for Philadelphia, where I'll transfer trains and catch another one to New York.

Think that doesn't make sense? Wait until I tell you the whole story...

We begin our story in Rochester New York, where after a morning meeting with our client, our team heads to the airport to try and beat the winter storm to NYC.

We arrive, with tickets booked on a 1:20 flight to LaGuardia...

We had to wait in a long line to check in, because US Air decided (were forced) to abandon the self-check in kiosks for the time being. You know, because those things are so inconvenient.

Anyway, we (my project manager and I) wait in a relatively long line before finally receiving assistance individually.

I get checked in for the 1:20, and then go wait with my manager while he checks in. The woman checking him in, who seemed to be a little stressed (it was hard to tell because she seemingly had applied her makeup with an industrial grade paint sprayer), mentioned that she could get my project manager onto a 12:30 flight that was currently delayed.

I was a little miffed that my check-in helper wasn't as helpful, and asked to get included.

She punched some buttons, without acknowledging my request, and handed my project manager his ticket. It was a ticket for the 1:20 flight.

Whatever, we figured it didn't really matter since both were probably going to be delayed, we can be on the same flight.

So we sit around the airport, waiting for our flight to board. The 1:20 got delayed until 1:40 (certainly great on the spectrum of flight delays), while at the gate next door, the 12:30 was announced as not leaving until 2:40.

Sucks for them, we thought.

Our plane arrived, and we were both excited to get on it and get home.

But as we went to board, the gate agent (the very same pancake makeup woman from before), scanned my manager's ticket and refused to board him. Apparently she had switched the ticket, but didn't tell him or print him a new boarding pass. He would have to wait for the other flight.

Sucked for him, and when I approached her, she said I would have the same problem.

'Just scan the ticket' I requested, knowing that it was likely no one actually did anything when I asked to switch planes.

Sure enough, I still had my seat, and on the plane I went.

You'd think that would be a good thing, perhaps the end of the story?

No. No, this is where it gets weird.

We sat on the runway/tarmac/purgatory for a while as we waited for de-icing, and because the plane was initially late in getting to the gate, we missed our initial window into LaGuardia.

Eventually, they let us take off and we fly over to NYC, where we spin around for a while until they tell us, 'We won't be allowed to land, so we're going to go back to Harrisburg'

Crap.

I grab the US Air magazine and flip to the map pages in the back. Harrisburg, in case you didn't know, is just about as far west from NYC as Rochester is. Not exactly making progress.

We pull up to the gate in Harrisburg, and I'm already assuming worst-case. As the wheels hit the ground, I'm on the phone with our travel department to book a train from Harrisburg to New York, assuming no planes are getting in there tonight.

'There's a 5:35 train from Harrisburg to New York,' the travel agent tells me, otherwise you'll need to go to Philadelphia and switch trains.

The time of that call? Roughly 5:05.

I could make it! I thought. And I reserved a space and quickly made my way off the plane.

Of course, it wasn't that easy. The train station in Harrisburg is about 15 minutes away from the airport. It'd be tight, but I could do it if I threw money at a cabbie and yelled 'Step on it!' (which I kind of always wanted to do anyway)

But wait, I needed my bag, which due to our small plane's size, had to be gate checked at Rochester. A gate check, for those unfamiliar, is when they make you hand your bag over to some guy at the gate, and when you get off, a different version of that guy brings you bag out to you.

It could take 2 minutes, could take 10, high variance for sure.

So I scrambled off the plane and waited impatiently...I could make the train if I could just get my bag, tear through the small airport, and get to the train station.

Tick tock, tick tock.

Finally, after what seemed like an eternity but was probably only 3 minutes, the gate agent in Harrisburg (who was under an oppressive seige from angry Rochesterians) announced.

"We are taking all bags, including gate checks, and putting them on baggage claim carousel #1"

And like that, the 5:35 train went up in smoke.

No baggage handlers in the history of civilization have ever taken less than 15 minutes to offload a plane.

So with that went my direct train, and the chance to get to New York at a reasonable time.

As I sat, frustrated, planning for my 6:40 train (on which I currently sit), I got an email from my project manager.

"Hey, did you land at LaGuardia yet? They let us land"

:::smacks forehead:::

Don't be a Hero

2010-02-06T11:36:00.000-08:00

It's almost Super Bowl Sunday, which means we're also perilously close to the end of the football season (that faint 'yay' you just heard coming from the middle of the country was the sound of my girlfriend cheering)

And as the season draws to an end, we can only hope that the Colts win this Sunday's match-up against the Katrina Memorial Saints. (It's not that I have anything in particular against the Saints, I just want Peyton Manning to go down as better than Tom Brady, because he is, so I'll be a Colts fan)

But more broadly, as I was listening to an NFL-related podcast, I came back to thinking about my own hypothetical football career. No, not my secret plans to make billions of dollars, buy a team and then make myself GM. What I mean are my plans to play in the NFL, if I could choose any position to play.

An important caveat, is that we aren't talking about where you'll create your digital version of yourself in Madden or some other video game. In those circumstances, you go for the glory, quarterback, running back, something flashy. You're little digital self needs to get digitally paid, digital endorsements, and dates with the little digital cheerleaders. He should go big.

But if you had to pick a position to play in the NFL, you personally had to put on a uniform and go out there every Sunday...you'd be crazy not to be a punter.

I know, I know, sounds crazy, but hear me out because I've given it some thought.

Now it's true, as a punter, you don't get the glory that the big time guys get. But if I was going to want to play in the NFL, I would want two things...

- I'd like to play for a long time
- I'd like to not get killed

And hey, if possible, I'd like to avoid getting booed to the point that I'd lash out and spit on a fan or something.

Punter, that's the safe choice.

If you want to be a running back, that's great, have a nice 4 year run until you've been tackled so hard and so long you can't get out of bed. Defensive line? That's great if you want to have the physical equivalent of a car crash 50 times a week. Quarterback? Forget about the physical pounding, you get second-guessed by every armchair genius with a TV.

When you're the punter, no one cares about you (except for the die hards, and they probably don't even care that much)

It's really hard to draw attention as a punter, and it's almost as hard to get the crowd to hate you. Whenever you come in the game, it's already 4th down, the crowd's already disappointed, they likely aren't even paying attention to what you're up to.

And you might not have a huge signing bonus or huge endorsements, but you do make a good living. A quick check of USA Today's database shows that all the punters in the league make over $330k a year, and lots of them bring home over a million.

All you have to do is watch out for those overzealous special teams players that want to light you up, and like Jeff Feagles, you can play forever.

So if you've got a kid that's looking to go pro, tell him to be smart and start kicking

You Want to Know Why AT&T's Network Sucks

2010-01-14T15:05:00.000-08:00

Quick post, I checked my AT&T wireless bill today. For those who didn't know, I recently upgraded my beat up Blackberry to a sweet new iPhone.

While I loved my Blackberry, the iPhone is freaking amazing. The only hesitations I had were battery life (not an issue at the moment) and network coverage. Everyone in NYC talks about iPhones dropping calls on AT&T's network.

Well, knock on wood, I haven't had any so far. But, when I was looking at my bill, it was obvious why AT&T's network may be at a breaking point (or at least not as good as Verizon's)

The chart below illustrates my personal cell phone data usage over the last few weeks.

See if you can figure out when I got my new toy...

Yeah, that's probably why.

Proper Ettiquette

2010-01-11T18:13:00.000-08:00

I've had a few conversations recently with some close friends, close enough to be readers of this blog anyway. They have expressed concern that I hold no regard for my career safety, due to the nature of some of my posts.

In an effort to assuage their concerns, this post will have nothing to do with my work, although it will have to do with office conduct. Don't worry, I'll keep it respectable.

The topic for today is urinals and the mens' room.

More specifically, about the all too frequent breaches in decency that occur within.

Now I know, it's a mens' room, and we can't expect very much, even in a professional environment.

People will still throw their garbage on the floor. People will still make a mess of the soap dispensers. And for some god unknown reason, sober men will continue to...umm...let a couple pitches get away from them.

But that pales in comparison to the fact that some people, and I won't say who, but some, feel that it's perfectly acceptable to talk to you when you're in there.

Now, I'm not talking about some chit chat while you're both at the sink, and I'm not referring to a casual how's it going when you cross paths at the door.

No, I'm talking about full on talking while you're, um, occupado.

The official urinal rules for men are quite clear on the subject. They aren't officially printed anywhere as far as I know. I think it's just one of those things you're supposed to naturally understand, like how people getting hit in the crotch is funny. No one tells you it's funny, it just is.

Similarly, there are a few simple rules.

1 - When entering a mens room, if there is someone at a urinal, then you go occupy the urinal that is absolutely furthest away. I don't care if that far urinal is on fire and shooting poison darts...that's where you go.

2 - When you are at the urinal itself. There is exactly one direction to look (forward) and exactly no things that are necessary to say. None. Not negotiable.

I mean sure, we've all probably blurted out a few words when we've had a bit to drink. I'm not saying we're all perfect.

But in a professional setting, please don't approach the urinal as if it's a water cooler or coffee machine to be talked around. One could argue it's the exact opposite. Now that I think about it, if you are drinking whatever you're standing around, then feel free to chat. And if that thing happens a urinal, then talking in the bathroom will be the least awkward moment you have that day.

I say this because my peers at the firm and I have had long debates on the subject, and it frequently comes up because people keep chatting away.

Today, as I was in what I'll term the 'disengagement' phase of the process, a senior member of the firm gave me a cheerful hello. It surprised me, because I was obviously in full-on back out mode and was even giving the reverse counter-clockwise spin to avoid facing him.

Of course, he was a senior guy at the firm, so I returned his greeting, and got the hell out of there (don't worry, it was after I washed my hands)

Quick Vacation Wake Up

2010-01-04T16:42:00.000-08:00

Today was the first day back at work after a little over a week of relaxation. My girlfriend came in from the windy city, and managed to bring the wind with her (it was absolutely freezing in New York).

We spent a week doing touristy New York things, because she hadn't spent a ton of time here, and I hadn't spent a ton of time here actually doing stuff besides working and sleeping. We did the ice skating thing, the broadway thing, we even mugged some tourists late at night just for fun (Of course, we had to pick someone we could overpower easily, which is why I'm the proud owner of a new Hello Kitty backpack)

We also ate our way up and down the island, sampling the best pizza, donuts, cookies, and cupcakes the city has to offer.

Which is why I did a double take hopping on the scale the other day. And I'm pretty sure I heard the elliptical machine groan 'Wow you're fat' under my weight as I jumped up on it this morning.

But that's not the quick wake up from vacation I was referring to. No, this one is work-related, in another tale of things that probably happen a lot in consulting.

REMAINING SECTIONS REDACTED

Another Edition of Tales from Management Consulting!

2009-12-22T16:36:00.000-08:00

:::cue spooky music and thunder clap:::

I thought I'd pop in with another quick story of stuff that's happened during the course of my project.

We're wrapping up my current engagement, the details of which are not important for the purposes of this story. Suffice it to say, there was a conference call scheduled earlier this week with the CEO of our client and other top executives.

Our project team leaders, partners at our firm, had requested the meeting at the end of one of our steering committee meetings (It's called the steering committee because it's made up of leadership that will periodically guide, or "steer" the ongoing effort. You know, like the captains of a large ocean liner like the Titanic only without the large giant iceberg and thousands of hypothermia-related deaths)

Anyway, because we had attended that steering committee meeting, we (myself and the other associate on the project), were included on the invitation to the CEO conference call that was put together by the executive's assistant.

Good for us, because we wouldn't typically be included on such a high-level and relatively impromptu discussion.

Of course, the client executive team, and our own project leaders, didn't exactly give us permission to attend.

So, our plan was to dial in to the call early, to be there right at the beginning when everyone joins, mute our phone, and simply listen to hear what was going on and what the next steps of the project would be.

Simple, right?

So we dial in to the call, when the conference system announces that we'll now be placed into conference and that there are only three people on the call.

:::Electronic Beeps:::

Client Executive: Hello this is the team at Client X, who else has joined the call?

Consulting Firm Manager: This is X with Y Consulting Firm

Client Executive: Hello...

:::AWKWARD PAUSE:::

Client Executive: I thought there was someone else on the call?"

At this point, we're not sure exactly what to do. We've just been made, but dropping off might be too blatant. Also, we had received specific instructions NOT to introduce ourselves because of the whole lack of specific permission thing. If we were Allied spies in Nazi Germany...this is the point where we'd dash off for a high stakes life or death chase through the Alps.

But this isn't a movie, so we just cursed in our conference room.

Suddenly, more beeps came on the line, a few, maybe two, maybe four. People began to announce themselves, and we breathed a sigh of relief.

It won't matter, we thought, we just got lost in the shuffle.

The new attendees introduced themselves over the phone, and then there was another awkward pause...

Client Executive: I thought there was one more person on the call..."

At that point we received an email from our team...

"Just drop off the call, now"

We hung up on the conference, leaving them to guess who dropped off, and leaving us to wonder what might be said

Fair Use

2009-12-20T09:49:00.000-08:00

I've been living in my new Manhattan apartment for a little over three months now, and I'm starting to adjust to the new surroundings.

The doormen finally know who I am, even with all the long work hours and traveling that meant they often weren't sure I even lived in the building.

I'm also getting used to the workout room here. I won't go so far as to call it a gym, because it's literally a studio apartment on the second floor that's been converted. It doesn't have much in the way of equipment, just a large rack of free weights, two treadmills, and two elliptical machines. Certainly adequate, although I miss UChicago's Ratner center (my workout room also doesn't have the first ever awarded Heisman trophy).

Anyway, one of the nicer touches our workout room does have is a big office-cliche style water cooler. A giant jug of refrigerated spring water, complete with the rack of little cone cups that you can't set down on anything so you'd better drink your water all at once.

It's definitely nice to have, although many times I'll go to work out and find it empty. Not only does it leave me a little thirsty, but it also made me wonder, who was drinking all this water?

I've used the facility on all types of days at all different hours, and I very rarely see anyone else there. Moreover, I very rarely see anyone who IS there actually take some water.

So where is it all going? This morning I got a clue as to the answer.

As I was finishing up my workout, the door to the workout room opened (it's locked, and each resident who requests a key can get their own).

I was stretching, so the first thing I noticed were this man's feet. They had shoes on, but they were flashy stylish casual sneakers. They didn't seem to be workout shoes. He was also wearing jeans. Again, not part of your typical workout outfit, and clearly not endorsed as suitable attire by any licensed professional trainer.

He walked into the workout room and turned immediately to his right, focusing his attention on the water cooler, and in a very matter of fact way, placed two large empty plastic bottles on top of the cooler.

He then took the first bottle, placed it under the water cooler spigot, and began to fill it.

I looked on, horrified as he calmly siphoned off water intended for those in a much sweatier and wearier condition.

The bottle filled, and he brought it up to his eye level, where he examined it like a chemist checks a graduated cylinder for precision. Unsatisfied, he filled it up a little more. Once complete, he repeated the process with the remaining empty bottle, as I stood there, waiting for my now meager by comparison cone cup.

He left, now burdened with the extra weight of two full bottles of water, and as I drank my own I felt a bitter taste of complete irrational indignation.
From my perspective, this water belonged to ME...and to every other tenant who needs water after a workout. Now, I haven't seen this gentleman's apartment, so maybe he doesn't have running water, a refrigerator, or a BRITA. Of course, maybe he just doesn't have any decency.

Who steals water from the gym? And what should I do to combat this problem?

Poison the water! That was my first idea. I dismissed it as slightly problematic, after all, where does one even buy poison?

My second idea was just to quit my job and sit in the gym, all day, every day, patiently waiting for this or another similar bottle-filler to come in. I would pretend to be going about my workout, then when they fill their water bottles and turn to leave, I would snatch the bottles and run away, re-distributing the water to thirsty looking people like a modern-day Robin Hood. Only no tights.

There was also brief thought of rational discussion with the water stealer, but that ultimately was also dismissed as impractical. Settling disputes face to face isn't what we're supposed to do, we supposed to just privately complain, that's what the internet is for!

I also gave some thought to whether I might be wrong in this situation. The water is available for residents of the building. And while it may be intended specifically for those who use the workout room, is it right that anyone should be able to use it as they see fit? Perhaps...

Although if that is the case, I've always wanted to wash my car in clean and refrigerated spring water...

I bet this happens a lot in consulting

2009-12-06T09:19:00.000-08:00

In the middle of a midtown Manhattan office, two Associates are working on the same project team

Associate 1: Hey, are you working on the project application map?

Associate 2: Yeah, are you working on the technology process flows?

Associate 1: Yeah...why?

Associate 2: The senior team told me I should use your process flows to create my application map.

Associate 1: Uh, well, the senior team told me I should use YOUR project application map for MY technology process flows.

Associates 1 and 2 (together): Shit

And scene

Atlantic City Adventure

2009-11-23T06:08:00.000-08:00

Atlantic City really is kind of a dump.

It's dirty, or dingy, maybe that's a better word. Grimy, that might actually be even better.

It certainly seems dangerous, at least if you wander off the boardwalk where you're comforted by the casino paramilitary security forces.

It's also filled with cigarette smoke and old people, each of which make things a little inconvenient and a little less fun. At least with smoking a lot of places now have 'smoking rooms', which are little tiny glass encased rooms for smokers to sit and puff in. Really just makes me think of a prison gas chamber. Can't figure out why they can't have the same setup for the elderly (note: this does not pertain to the fun old people that occasionally dot the gambling landscape, I'm really talking about the ones who wheel their oxygen tank to the slot machines).

So yeah, Atlantic City can be kind of depressing, and given my gambling track record, it usually has been for me. But I went down there this past weekend, and for the first time in my gambling life (or career? Is career a better term? I guess I don't want to suggest it's a job, so no), everything seemed to be coming up roses.

I was meeting some friends from home after work on Friday, and figured I'd just take the bus down from Manhattan to meet them. Without a car in New York, and with an oddly irregular train schedule (departures at 2pm or 8pm, really?), I felt like Greyhound would actually make some more sense.

I thought I was taking this thing called the Greyhound Lucky Streak, which is a bus that will charge you for a ticket, take you straight to a casino, where a nice casino host will give you money to go gamble. Seemed like a good deal, although Greyhound was essentially pimping us out to the casinos, delivering us right into their clutches with the promise of a few dollars. At least I got to keep my clothes on.

The bus ride itself was its own adventure. Apparently Greyhound's NYC-AC run isn't really popular with young men in their 20's. You know who it is popular with? Overweight people. So I spent the ride fighting over the armrest with a portly older woman like the British and Germans negotiating over the Sudetenland. I ended up with it, which makes her Chamberlain. It also makes me Hitler. Whatever, I really wanted that armrest.

There was also a great moment departing Port Authority bus station. As we rounded a corner in the underground bus terminal, there was a big booth that appeared to house station security or some other group of employees. They had one of those big digital counters that read, "Number of consecutive days without a collision." The counter had four digits, which means it could hypothetically get up to 9,999.

You know how many days Port Authority had gone without a collision?

Five! The counter literally read 0005, in big red numbers. Now, if you're the manager, do you really want to illuminate it when it's at five??? Why not wait until you've at least gotten to 10...then you're in two-digit territory? Or maybe seven, a full week? I guess they just have a lot of accidents. Makes you feel good right before a 2+ hour bus ride.

Anyway, the bus finally arrived at the casino, and after a while, I finally met up with my friends. We threw our stuff in the room (even though we're in our late-20's, we haven't yet reached the point where we're willing to pay for multiple rooms. Blame it on the economy) and we headed out to find our fortunes.

It was safe to say that Atlantic City was glad to have us. The casinos were so dead I actually saw a cocktail WAITER for the first time in almost a decade of gambling! It was an actual dude serving drinks, that has to be some kind of apocalyptic sign. I think the Mayans may have covered that in their 2012 end of the world scenario.

But we wandered around, unfazed by the bad sign, and at some point (and after a few drinks), wound up at a section of our hotel called, "The Ridge"

What is the Ridge? Well, let me try to explain.

Picture a casino/hotel that's a little run down. It's not really got a lot going on, not a lot of young people, and definitely not hip. It's not the Borgata, but it wants to be. Or at least it wants its young blood like some kind of non-Twilight vampire. Like an old vampire.

So what does it do? It colors an entire section of casino in purple. It puts a giant dance floor in the middle of the dance floor. It throws in a bar, a DJ table, and it makes its dealers dance.

Yes, it appears as through they make casino dealers, generally some of the most unfriendly people in the world, shake their respective groove things.

For the record, dancing is usually funny, but forced dancing is always hilarious.

That and $10 table minimums, and we were sold on The Ridge. We started playing blackjack, and I had on of those runs I'd always read about. I hit a couple blackjacks, got some dealer busts, split two eights and got another eight, split that, and won all three hands. It was that kind of run, which I don't think I've ever had. I didn't win a ton of money, but managed to triple my buy-in and celebrated by buying a round of what probably were ill-advised shots. Didn't really matter though, I was the big winner, with our planned poker tournament excursion on tap for Saturday.

Fast forward through the breakfast buffet explosion to the 1pm poker tournament at Bally's. It's a run of the mill hold 'em tournament, with a $75 buy-in (a portion of which goes to the house and portion of which goes to a player prize pool)

They had 111 players for our tournament, scattered across several tables throughout the poker room.

I've played a few of these in the past, maybe 5-10 during my visits to casinos over the year. They almost always go like this:

- I take my stack of chips and sit down
- I get nothing but terrible cards
- I get up from the table with no chips

This time however, things were a little different.

I saw some jacks, I saw a queen or two, even saw a few aces.

And I stuck around.

We played through the first hour, and I was still sitting there. Of course that wasn't a big deal, it seemed like everyone was still there. But I had a decent pile of chips, enough that I wasn't crippled when a really really old guy with an oxygen tank sucked out a runner-runner flush on me (which made me think evil thoughts about the old man which included but were not limited to, messing with his oxygen tank, physically assaulting him, and refusing to get off his lawn)

But I hung around, and hung around, and hung around.

My friend kept coming over from his table to ask how I was doing. The answer was always the same...

"I'm still sitting here"

And I sat there for a while (probably over 5 hours, which was certainly way to much sitting for my tastes)

I stole a lot of pots with pre-flop raises followed by flop bets, and kept enough chips that I wasn't even that annoyed with the losers wearing sunglasses (A brief aside on wearing sunglasses at the poker table: If you're playing in the World Series of Poker, or some super high stakes cash game, then maybe, maybe you can get away with sunglasses. But really, we're playing at Bally's in Atlantic City at a $75 tournament! You, guy or girl with sunglasses, are NOT a professional, I am NOT a professional, we are all amateurs, and you aren't hiding anything with your glasses, you're just revealing the fact that you're an idiot.)

Steps off soapbox)

Finally, as the blind levels (forced betting) got higher and higher, people started to get knocked off. After a while, we finally got whittled down from the original 111 to the final ten.

The final ten is important for two reasons. One, it's called the final table for a reason, it's just cool to have made it there. Two, it means you actually win money.

That was the hardest part of the tournament, when there were maybe 15 people left, and everyone just wanted to make it to 10th place to walk away with some money. In reality, coming in 11th place and getting nothing might be worse than coming in 111th, at least you would've saved some time.

But I had a good stack around then, and generally could avoid the fray and make it to the final 10. And once I got there, I figured I might as well stay a while.

There were a bunch of us with relatively small stacks of chips. And it was clear a bunch of us were trying to wait everyone out and back into more money. Every now and then, I would steal blinds (raising early to drive out other people and take their forced bets) and make sure I could stick around.

The other guys didn't, or they tried to steal from the one guy with a ton of chips and ran into trouble.

And as they got knocked off one by one, I looked up at the tournament payout screen and saw my potential winnings go up and up.

Pretty soon, there were only three of us. One guy had a large share of the chips, and me and the other guy were at about the same level.

Then we kept going, and for about a half-hour, I picked at the other guys. Stealing the increasingly high blinds, picking spots, and gaining ground on the chip leader.

I kept at it of a while, enough so that when the third place guy suggested we split all the prize money, the chip leader was happy to divide all the money equally amongst the three of us.

Just so we're clear on the situation, first place was set to pay out ~$2,500, second place was ~$1,500, and third place was ~$750.

If we all split equally, the tournament director told us, we'd all take home a little over $1,600 each.

Knowing the relatively uncertain nature of heads-up poker, I happily accepted the offer. I think the chip leader was scared of playing me, either that or he was just sick and tired of sitting for that long.

We all shook hands, congratulated each other, and counted out our large piles of hundred dollar bills (which unless the IRS reads my blog, won't get taxed...did I say piles of hundreds? I meant piles of fives). I had to resist the urge to make it rain in the casino.

My friends and I celebrated with dinner, and called it a trip.

I basically had the best gambling trip of my life, particularly given that I've done nothing but lose consistently for the last couple years. And now, as I enter my refractory period, I'm struggling with the strong possibility that it will never get better than this (gambling wise of course...certainly they'll be tons of better moments in my actual life, at least I hope so), turning $75 into $1,600.

But something tells me I haven't seen my last poker room.

Hating Belichick a Little Less

2009-11-17T06:43:00.000-08:00

I'm on board Amtrak and headed down the northeastern corridor, but have been reading a lot about this past Sunday night's Patriots-Colts game.

I had just gotten into New York that night, and had checked the score as I walked through the airport to see the Colts down by a lot, 24-7 if I remember correctly.

Since I hate the Patriots, this was unfortunate.

But I continued to monitor the game as I headed back to my apartment for the same reason most young guys do, my critical fantasy football matchup.

With Colts WR Reggie Wayne carrying my roster against my opponents Patriots WR (and all-around jerk) Wes Welker, I wasn't feeling too good about my chances and left ESPN gamecast running as I hopped in the shower.

Of course, only after I got out of the shower did I see the final score, Colts win 35-34, on a last minute TD by none other than Reggie Wayne.

Good news of course, especially because the Patriots are cheaters and Peyton Manning should always beat them.

But what was interesting to me was the next morning, when Patriots coach Bill Belichick, who has been praised more than any professional coach in any sport over the last decade, was getting hammered by the media.

His crime, he went for it on fourth down, the Patriots failed to convert, Peyton Manning got the ball back, and the rest is history.

Unfortunately, as much as I've hated Belichick for things like his cheating and being an all-around not nice guy, he actually may have made the right decision.

The whole incident, precipitated by going for it on fourth down, brings up an issue I always harp on when watching the NFL. The fact that NFL coaches, by a large, are terrified of doing anything that could get the criticized.

Punting on fourth down, as opposed to going for it in a makeable situation, is the most obvious example and one that happens in just about every game.

Belichick, now that he's reached 'I'm-Keith Hernandez' status from his Super Bowl rings, no longer has to worry about being called a moron or his job security. To be fair, I don't think he's ever been worried about that stuff since he joined the Patriots, and that's one of the reasons he's a good coach.

Belichick knew, as any smart football fan does, that the whole going for it decision boils down to a relatively simple calculation of expected value.

This webpage is a pretty good calculator that will let you figure it out for yourself.

http://belichick-decision.heroku.com/

But at its most basic level, I think Belichick was right to go for it and try to end the game, even if he was deep in his own territory.

Had he succeeded, all we would hear about is how Belichick is a tremendous coach, has guts, knows his team, or some other such nonsense.

Instead, his call didn't work out, and he's an idiot.

It pains me to say it, but I have to disagree.

WorkworkworkworkBLOGworkworkwork

2009-11-12T16:38:00.000-08:00

I've got some down time for the moment, and since it's a relatively rare occurrence these days, I figured I'd try to bang out a blog post as quickly as possible. That means there will probably be tons of spelling mistakes, run on sentances, and gushing streams of consciousness (moreso than usual)

As you may have guessed, I've been a little busy. So let's get you guys up to date on how my introduction to the world of full time consulting has gone.

My first project was originally billed as a four week project for a media company assisting them with some new product strategy work. Quick review: great project. It ended up running for an extra week to do some additional analyses, but I thought it was a fantastic opportunity to a) do really interesting strategy work in my favorite industry, and b) get to meet people within my firm that do the kind of work I'd love to keep doing (only catch being there's not a ton of it).

I did a whole bunch of things that I didn't exactly know how to do, but learned on the way, which is the whole benefit of a consulting gig right? I helped create and field a survey to thousands of potential new product customers. I interviewed a bunch of senior executives to talk about their needs. I had to learn a whole new software package just so I could take some raw data and figure out key takeaways from our survey results. I created a revenue model to estimate how big this product could be (answer: not insignificant). And I saw my work essentially leaked in the Wall Street Journal...which was weird, because I sure as heck didn't tell them, and neither did the rest of my team.

The project worked me pretty hard, but I guess I didn't spend all that time in business school to not work hard, that's why I go to casinos.

My new project has actually got me traveling a bit. Turns out, I actually kind of like it and may even prefer it. Sitting in airports/train stations/rental cars is not ideal, duh, but when I travel I get a hotel that will have cable TV (which my apartment doesn't), and I'll usually get a decent gym (better than the one in my apartment). Of course, the hotel I stayed at this week was a rare exception. They had two pretty old treadmills, some weird elliptical model I've never encountered, and one 30 pound dumbbell. Seriously, they just had the one. Who does that? Or did someone steal it? And what would they do with it if they did?!?

But I digress.

This project is focused on helping an insurance company improve their business processes. I could tell you more, but you're head would probably explode from all the excitement.

Other than that, things have been going well. I got to participate in my first few MBA recruiting events, and I'd say they've been just about everything I could hope for. It's very funny to have MBA students, all looking for jobs, under the impression that I can seriously make or break their chances. Everyone is very polite, they usually write me nice thank you notes after meeting me, and maybe the weirdest part, they will literally laugh at anything I say that might be potentially funny.

They're in that weird spot where they don't want to not laugh if what I'm saying is a joke, so I think to play it safe they all will give at least a weak chuckle regardless of what I say.

I'm trying to think of things that are definitely NOT funny that I can test the theory with.

"I got really bad food poisoning the other day. I had to go to the hospital."

"My cat got hit by a car last week. She didn't make it."

"Holocaust Holocaust HOLOCAUST"

I bet you there would be a tremendously awesome awkward moment where they start to laugh, then see my serious face, then get really concerned. I'll have to work to make that happen one of these days.

Apart from that there's not much doing. I actually haven't spent much time in my NYC apartment in the last month. Multiple trips to Chicago for some weddings with the GF, as well as a trip out to see Penn State completely fold to a big 10 rival. The football game wasn't any good, but I did get to eat a 'Fat Doughboy' sandwich form R.U. Hungry that had the following on it:

Steak
Chicken Fingers
Mozzarella Sticks
French Fries
Bacon
Ketchup
Mayonnaise

It's the little things in life...

$5.01, really?

2009-10-07T04:42:00.000-07:00

I was visiting with my girlfriend this past weekend, and she said something really interesting (not that she doesn't do that all the time, but this was particularly interesting)

It was interesting not just because it was right, but also because it sounded EXACTLY like something I would say!

She asked me if I had seen the new Arby's commercial.

I hadn't, but that didn't matter, she was about to explain it to me.

"Why," she wondered "would Arby's promote their combos and set a price at five dollars and one penny?!?"

"Why the extra penny?" she continued, getting more and more animated as she built herself into an anti-Arby's rant.

The combos, near as I can tell (and now that I've seen the commercials for myself) are just their sandwiches with a drink and fries.

The commercials harp on the fact that the combos are worth the extra penny, or something like that.

My girlfriend just couldn't get it. And I agreed. Why in the world would you create a huge campaign to announce that your combo meal is incrementally MORE expensive than all the other options (Subway, Quizno's, KFC).

Maybe they're trying to establish themselves as THE premium crappy sandwich place.

I don't know much about Arby's, having been opposed to them ever since I heard they were calling their roast beef sandwiches, 'Roastburgers'.

Those things aren't burgers! As someone who cooks 90% of their own meals on a George Foreman grill, I know what the heck a burger is and what it is not and it is NOT a roast beef sandwich!

See, see how animated I got just there? That's how she got.

Either we're more similar than I thought, or I'm rubbing off on her

Small world, this consulting thing

2009-10-01T17:00:00.000-07:00

I've only been in consulting for a few weeks, and I've been amazed at the number of small world coincidences I've already run into through training and my first project:

- During a training exercise, our hypothetical project team had a meeting interrupted by two more senior guys playing 'partners.' As soon as they walked in, I immediately recognized one as my interviewer from internship recruiting at school for another firm. Of course, I didn't get that job, but I had always thought it was because I bombed the other interview so I didn't feel too awkward.

- In getting involved with the Chicago Booth recruiting team, I had to get in touch with the team's recruiting head. When I finally found him, it turned out he was formerly the recruiting head for a different consulting firm. I met him during internship recruiting too, and it was my discussion with him that got me my interview. Weird.

- On the first day of my project, we're sitting in a team room at the client (a large media company that will remain undisclosed). The client team is coming down, and when they come in I recognize the most senior guy. He used to be a pretty senior guy at another big consulting firm, working almost exclusively in media and entertainment. I had spent a good half an hour talking with him at a recruiting even before he jumped off the consulting ship.

Totally weird...I'm half expecting to run into every other person that didn't give me a job during business school...

That would be an awful lot of people

New New York City

2009-09-27T13:09:00.000-07:00

Just in case you assumed I went off to work and forgot all about blogging, I'm making sure to take part of this weekend to give a quick update on what's been happening since I started work on the 11th.

In short, work has been going well.

We had a brief week of training, which was fine and a good chance to see everyone from my former summer internship class.

On the Friday of training week, we were dismissed in the early afternoon, so I went with the other new New York associates back to the office.

Throughout the week, I would keep a close watch on my inbox, looking for anything that would indicate what my staffing situation would be.

I could have been staffed anywhere, or nowhere, and I really really wanted to know.

So I'm back in the office on Friday, and haven't heard anything. Time keeps ticking, and the closer I get to the end of the day, the more I'm convinced I won't be staffed and will start my career on the 'beach'

But late in the day, I finally got an email from an admin in the office.

Later on that day I got what essentially was a confirmation.

I was indeed staffed, on a local project, on a strategy assignment for a media company.

Woo-hoo!

We started last Monday, spending most of our time in our own offices. The work has been really interesting, although given it was originally proposed as a 7 week project and got compressed to 4 weeks, there has been a fair amount of work to do.

I've spent time working on a survey to potential customers, talking with vendors, and competitive landscape analyses on other products in the potential new product's space.

I'm really glad I got put on the project, now I just have to make sure I don't screw up. (That's the downside of getting a first project exactly where you want it, screwing up would make a pretty poor first impression)

Other than that, things have been ok. I'm adjusting to my new apartment (which is nice) and my new lack of cable TV (which is also ok), and my efforts to eat better (not really as ok)

It's definitely different in Manhattan. You have the convenience of everything, with the inconvenience of millions of other people everywhere. I have yet to determine whether it's a zero sum at the end of the day.

Attention MBA students, big brother is watching

2009-08-31T12:20:00.000-07:00

With summer generally comes nice weather and laziness. Chicago seems to have kept the nice weather at bay this year, but the city has done nothing to stop me from being lazy about blogging (a nice vacation in CA also didn't help).

I know postings have been long overdue, and I'm going to try and put some more out before I start work in ~2 weeks and I'm lost to the real world forever.

I got an email today that took me back, all the way back to last fall, when I was just another MBA student in the recruiting crunch.

When you try to get a job with a consulting firm (or any firm really) that recruits on campus, you're schedule quickly fills up with all kinds of sponsored events.

- Come meet a few company employees for dinner

- Attend a presentation on new intellectual capital from a company partner

- Swing by your local office to do some interview prep work with the firm

Etc. Etc. Etc., the list goes on and on, and for those trying to juggle multiple firms (which is everyone), it can get rather complicated.

This is only made worse for those paranoid students out there who worry that their every move is being tracked and evaluated. These types (and yes, I was certainly one of them), struggle with which events to attend, which to skip, and how that will be perceived by potential hiring decision makers.

Of course, there were some that dismissed such concerns, some that sat back and felt like these firms had way more important things to do rather than track candidates every move.

Well, score one for the paranoids among us.

Earlier today I got a job postings email from the school's career services office (and no, I'm not looking for a new job, I just like to see what's going on). In today's email there was a posting from a major consulting firm for a 'Recruiting Associate.' I thought that was interesting, not as a career switch for myself, but just as someone who's gone through the recruiting process. Anyway, the description was fairly generic and typical for an HR recruiting description (leaving out the odd decision to recruit MBAs for a position that doesn't require an MBA)

But the following section of the 'Essential Duties and Responsibilities' section caught my eye:

- Database Maintanence
: Maintain candidate records in database, as well as hard copy candidate files
: Maintain event records, including logistical details and candidate attendance

Paranoia justified.

DVR

2009-08-20T09:43:00.000-07:00

Haven't posted in the last few days (weeks? I really haven't been keeping track), but I guess it's because I'm in the last throes of my summer vacation before work starts in September.

I'm back here in Chicago, and faced with a similar dilemma as to how to occupy my time.

Yesterday I waited at my girlfriend's apartment so the cable guy could come and fix her DVR. That counts as productive I guess. But what was funny was when my girlfriend mentioned she'd DVR'd a lot of movies and that if I wanted to kill time I could watch them.

I just checked the list of movies. I think it speaks for itself...the following has not been edited in any way...

- The Notebook
- What Happens in Vegas
- Atonement
- Sex and the City (the movie)
- Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2 (apparently there was a sequel)
javascript:void(0)
So, a DVR'd movie didn't exactly make it onto my agenda. However, I'm more concerned with the fact that I scheduled this same DVR to record an Eagles pre-season game. I think it may set off some kind of internal alarm due to a radical gender switch in programming that indicates a kidnapping and/or home invasion has happened.

You Dropped it in the Toilet?

2009-07-25T09:57:00.000-07:00

Just a brief anecdote...

I was at my girlfriend's apartment the other day. I forget the exact circumstances...but I needed to go brush my teeth.

I have a toothbrush there, and although we constantly debate the merit of her orange colored toothpaste, it's not a huge deal.

Anyway, I brush my teeth as usual and look to rinse with one of the three plastic cups sitting on the counter. There was a clear one, a blue one, and an orange one. I chose the orange one, swig some water, end of story.

That's when my girlfriend calls out from the other room.

'By the way, I dropped one of the cups in the toilet'

Now at this point I decide not to ask her why she would still keep a toilet-dunked cup on the bathroom counter...I'm much more interested in the color of said toilet-dunked cup.

'Which color cup was it???'

There was a slight pause.

'Orange.' she said.

I walked out of the bathroom and gave her a great big kiss...now we're even.

RCN Sucks

2009-07-22T14:03:00.001-07:00

I only have about a week left in my apartment, and mercifully, I will soon be rid of RCN as my cable provider. With some good fortune, I'll never have to deal with them again.

Of course, I couldn't just run out the clock on my cable plan without another example of how completely inept and ridiculous this company is.

I commented over a week ago about how my cable bill shot up to well over $100/month. I figured I had been on a promotion, and RCN, being a sneaky company that doesn't genuinely care about its customers (at least until they come perilously close to churning) just opted not to remind me.

I was wrong about that, they did remind me...today, a good 10 days after I got my 'enhanced' bill.

The letter I got today, which is dated July 13th, included the following:

Dear JC,

We want to thank you for being a loyal and valued RCN customer. As a valued customer, you deserve the best services at reasonable prices.

This letter is to inform you that the promotional pricing you signed up for is scheduled to end on your next billing cycle. We'd like to offer you the opportunity to keep all your current services for only an additional $20 per month.

Blah Blah Blah...All of us at RCN appreciate your business.

They appreciate my business and respect me so much that they waited until after I paid a higher bill to inform me that my bill would be going up...Gee, thanks guys. I sure can tell I'm a valued customer.

I also love that I have the great 'opportunity' to pay an extra $20/month. I can't wait for other great opportunities they might have like getting gouged for a premium movie channel, extorted into equipment 'rental' fees, or just having RCN thugs grab me outside my office and steal my lunch money.

This only adds to RCN's rich history of providing poorly functioning cable boxes, providing disturbingly inferior VOD interface, and let's not forget the six months I spent trying to get my internet fixed because my modem needed "re-provisioning" (note: Re-provisioning just means some worthless call center employee in either Bangalore or Salt Lake City types a 3 instead of a 2 on their computer...it took a number of visits from technicians and calls to figure it out)

So to Tom McKay, Senior Vice President of Operations & General Manager of RCN...I'm going to decline your generous offer of having me pay you more money. I look forward to returning your equipment, washing my hands of the whole affair, and never doing business with your organization again, unless it's to acquire your firm, torch the headquarters, and desecrate your remains.

Peace.

ESPN Chicago - Follow Up

2009-07-21T10:17:00.001-07:00

Back in April, I posted an entry about ESPN's newest foray into sports media, a regionally-focused portal based here in Chicago.

Well...it took five months, but the mainstream media finally caught on to the story. The NY Times published an article on the site

Here's what I wrote in April, shortly after the site's launch...

I would guess, based purely on my own web surfing habits, that ESPN can drive a ton of traffic to this new portal relative to the incumbent players. While I personally read articles from my hometown newspaper on their web site every day...I never go to Comcast's site. With that said, I'll go to ESPN.com's main page at least a dozen times a day. Something tells me I'd click through pretty often if they had a Philadelphia sports portal.

I would assume the new ESPN site will get huge Chicago traffic, and demonstrate that national media players who run successful internet enterprises can pick up niche audiences with regionalized perspectives. Part of this is based on my experience watching regional providers stink, or miss plenty of opportunities to build bigger internet audiences.

So how is it actually playing out? From the NY Times article...

In less than three months, ESPN Chicago has become the city’s top sports site, attracting about 590,000 unique visitors in June, according to data from comScore, an Internet measurement company. Second place went to The Tribune’s online sports section with 455,000 unique visitors.

ESPN plans to announce an expansion of this initiative into New York, Los Angeles, and Dallas.

Just remember where you should've read about it first