Aug 27 2010

I’m a PC!

I'm probably alone in my views on Microsoft's "I'm a PC" marketing campaign, but here goes anyway…

I'm a PC?  Really? Oh, well then I'm a toaster … and my wife is an egg whisk.

One of the points of marketing is to get people to believe you, and believe the wonderful things you say about your product, and ultimately to purchase said product from you.  Having as the cornerstone of your marketing campaign obvious lies, is really not all that bright.  Obviously, the guy/gal on the commercial is not a pc, but you could say that they "identify" with the PC and so you could let that slide.  The other one they keep saying is "Windows 7 was my idea".  Was it really?  Since that's obviously patently untrue, and we've caught you in lie #2, why should we pay any attention to the rest of the material?  I find this sort of advertising campaign insulting, not cute.

I thought the PC vs Mac ads were brilliant.  Funny, to the point for the most part, and entertaining.  Microsoft's attempt at doing a better campaign is pathetic at best.  They need to fire their lame marketing company and hire the firm who crafted the Priceline ads with William Shatner.  They are silly, but entertaining, and other than a bit of fun, don't insult the audience's intelligence.  Or how about the very simple concept Travelocity has going with a ceramic gnome.  Brilliant!

Aug 17 2010

Old laws

Our legal system seems to have a problem which does not seem to be being addressed in any effective manner: Laws are enacted (put on the books) on a regular basis, but they are not re-examined for relevance on  a regular basis.  This means that laws once put on the books tend to stay on the books, no matter how ridiculous they are.

We've all heard of crazy out-dated laws such as:

It is illegal to carry an ice cream cone in your back pocket on Sunday in Georgia.

A fine of $25 can be levied for flirting in New York. This old law specifically prohibits men from turning around on any city street and looking "at a woman in that way." A second conviction for a crime of this magnitude calls for the violating male to be forced to wear a "pair of horse-blinders" wherever and whenever he goes outside for a stroll.

It is illegal to drink a beer while sitting on your front porch (a 78 year old man was cited for this recently)

There are also slightly less obvious laws:

In California if you carry a handgun around, it's a misdemeanor.  If you carry around two sticks with a short length of chain or rope linking them, it's a felony!  (well, just think of the damage you could do with two sticks as opposed to a gun – of course sticks are more dangerous.  Sheesh!)

And some laws are right and true and make perfect sense to keep:

In California, A city ordinance states that a $500 fine will be given to anyone who detonates a nuclear device within city limits

And some laws are obviously not enforceable, so why do we have them?

In California, Animals are banned from mating publicly within 1,500 feet of a tavern, school, or place of worship.

We need periodic reviews of laws to eliminate the chaff from our legal system.  Currently, old laws are simply not enforced, and most people are completely unaware of them.  This is bad as it is ripe for abuse.  It makes legal harassment quite easy in that at any given time, it's likely you are violating some crusty old statute that nobody knows about, and subject to harassment by some law enforcement official who has decided he/she doesn't like you for some reason, and wants to make your life difficult by selectively enforcing some old law.  Selective enforcement is really a bad thing.  It's a recipe for civil abuse and for confrontation, and it waters down other laws too.  It gives those with authority seemingly arbitrary power to throw their weight around whenever they choose.  There have been many cases of this sort of thing (just scan YouTube if you feel like getting annoyed).

How do we solve this problem?  Periodic review of laws would be a great start.  We have far too many laws cluttering up the books.  It's much easier for people to be compliant, and much easier for enforcement if the tangle is smaller.  If laws were put on the books with a "review date" or "expiration date", so they had to be reviewed and re-confirmed in order to remain, that would help too.  Of course, there is a possibility of a law which IS needed falling off the books accidentally because somebody didn't manage the expiration date & review process properly.

Aug 12 2010

Banks and adjusting loans

With the downturn in the economy, many people have been hit hard (myself included).  Some have fared better than others, and the government stepped in and said that banks should negotiate loan adjustment in hardship cases. Problem solved, right?  Ah, but then there is reality.

I'm not sure how people managing banks manage to keep their jobs.  There seems to be a complete lack of thought and analysis in what they do.  No wonder our banking industry is such a mess.  Let me give you a couple of real-world examples from people personally known to me.

The Motorhome

The main breadwinner was laid off, and after some time it became clear that luxury items would have to be the first to go.  The mortgage was given priority with the limited funds available, and the motorhome was not paid for 3 months.  This got the attention of the bank, who wanted the loan brought current, or the vehicle surrendered to the bank.  The balance was $40,000 and there were several years left on the original loan schedule.  Since bringing the loan current wasn't possible given the limited funds available, a proposal was made to the bank to resume loan payments, but the missing 3 months worth of payments would be added to the end of the loan.  One would think this would be a pretty good solution for the bank.  They'd loose no money in the end, and not have to spend time and money taking any action.  Of course, the wizards at the bank decided it was not a good deal for them, and so the vehicle was repossessed.  The bank spent money to hire a company to repossess and store the vehicle, money to store it and auction it, and when it sold, they made less than $20,000.  So let's see, they are now out of pocket $20,000 right off the bat, and they aren't going to make any more interest on the loan.  Why yes, what a sound business decision to make! (sigh)  Even if they had done the deal and the people had flaked on the loan a few months later, they would have still been able to repossess the vehicle and so forth.  They had absolutely nothing to loose.  But you know what?  I bet they all got nice fat bonuses that year for their hard work and business acumen.

The Home

Another couple had a reduction in salary, and they knew by doing some simple projections that they would soon run out of money and be unable to pay their mortgage.  In order to prevent this from happening, they contacted the bank to arrange a loan adjustment.  Surprise! The bank said that they would not even talk to them about an adjustment until they were 3 months in arrears!  Well, that's certainly a dubious strategy.  Once people are in arrears, it is extremely difficult to fix the problem.  Also, for this couple to allow that to happen just to start a conversation is ridiculous.  Their credit would be immediately impacted (a long term effect, for no good reason – they were attempting to be good stewards), and they would be dicing with the possibility of a foreclosure.  In a booming real estate market, I can see that a bank might take this sort of approach in the hopes that they could foreclose, and sell the property for a big profit.  However, perhaps they haven't noticed that we don't have a booming real estate market at the moment.  Perhaps they enjoy having a large inventory of properties which they can't sell, are costing them money (taxes, etc), and are a hassle to rent (especially as it's becoming more and more difficult to find qualified renters).  Once again, where is the thought and strategy that is supposed to be employed when in a money management business like a bank?

I don't think that banks should be altruistic charities and simply forgive loans, or make crazy deals to make their customers happy.  On the other hand, I don't think that it's wise to make stupid business decisions which cost the bank money in the long run.  In our current environment, the name of the game should be "Minimizing Losses" and "Survival".  What is it going to take for them to "get the memo"?  If they keep making such bad decisions, we'll have bailout after bailout and the whole industry will sink.

Aug 11 2010

The Chipophone

The Chipophone. A chiptunes electric organ. [VIDEO].

Kudos to this guy for not only coming up with this idea, but following it through to completion!  He took an old electronic organ ('70s vintage), and replaced the innards with his own circuits.  The entire project is designed to enable to operator to accurately reproduce tunes from video games!  Not only did he pull this off, but he apparently learned to play a bunch of tunes.  It's clever, so I like that.  His commitment to a rather silly project, is commendable too.

Aug 10 2010

looking angry in photos

We've all seen them; photos of kids trying to look tough and pissed off, sometimes even throwing in one of those ever-so-clever gangsta signs. Apparently, they are trying to emulate Rap artists. I just have to say – I'm hoping yet again that this trend will go away soon.  I mean really, this is just silly.  Nobody is impressed.  Nobody is "oooo, scared".  So what's the point?  You just end up looking like somebody with tourette syndrome and maybe whatever ailment Joe Cocker had.  Oh yea, and pull your pants up please.

This stuff is even infiltrating traditionally conservative business.  Take our old friend Bill here:

I suppose a good thing about all this concern about "representin' " is the decreased accuracy, and therefore a lower fatality rate.  Click on the picture below, this article is very well written:

Aug 6 2010

Comment restrictions have been relaxed!

I decided to give this a try since it's always been a bit obnoxious to comment on postings.  If you are registered user, you can now leave comments in the same manner as before.

If you are not a registered user, you can now leave comments! You'll have to type in your name, email address, and pass one of those annoying Captcha tests which help prevent automated spam postings.  I'm hoping this will encourage more people to chime in.  If you find you like to comment, but don't like dealing with the Captcha system, then just register and all that goes away.