Random Post: Tracking Yourself With Fitbit
RSS .92| RSS 2.0| ATOM 0.3
  • Home
  • About
  •  

    Winter Olympics Are More American

    March 4th, 2010

    People like to makes jokes that the Winter Olympics are just a bunch of sliding games.  Well, for the most part that is true.  In fact, it may be totally true.  It is also true that most of the events require quite a bit of money to make happen.  Lets face it, there are not very many natural bobsled runs or half-pipes.  And getting to the top of a mountain isn’t exactly an every day sort of event.  But none of these things are the reason that I think the winter games are more American than their summer counterpart.

    No, the reason is that you and I could be there if we wanted to be there.  If we worked hard, practiced hard, and then rinsed and repeated, we could get there.  This is, in my opinion, in stark contrast to the summer games.  For many of the keystone events of the summer Olympics you are either born with it or not.  You could 100% optimize your body and will still lose every single time in the marathon.  You just cannot do it.  Same with sprinting.  You screwed from the onset.

    Take Michael Phelps.  Good swimmer?  Sure, but it is all in the genes.  He has Marfan Syndrome which, if it doesn’t kill you, makes you an ideally proportioned swimmer.  Here is an article explaining it a bit more.  Or another way is to look at this graphic that explains him a bit more:

    Here’s what it says:

    1. He is 6-4 but has a 6-7 wing span
    2. His lactate levels are the lowest ever recorded for a swimmer (he’s really good at producing energy)
    3. Not only are his arms long, but he has short legs allowing him “to plane in the water”
    4. He can hyperextend his elbows, knees, and ankles giving him an extremely unique ability in his stroke

    So again, he was born for it.  There is simply nothing that you can do to match it.  Make no mistake, I am not saying that the Winter Olympics don’t take athleticism.  That would be absurd.  I’m just saying there just isn’t the same level of genetic predisposition for the sports.  At the very least it is clear that genetics are a much lesser impact for the winter games.  Which also probably cuts down on the whole drug thing because it is so much more about the perfection of a skill set than about raw, athletic (and genetic) ability to compete.

    I acknowledge that there are certainly sports in the summer games that are much more skill based.  Rowing, for one.  Shooting events.  Volleyball.  I am just saying that, as a whole, the winter games are less dependent on innate ability and more about a honed skill.  The pinnacle of a “you too can make it” mentality.  And, to me, that just seems so darn American.

    Or do you guys think it is Canadian?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.



    How To Make Money On Theists, By Eternal Earth-Bound Pets

    February 24th, 2010

    This is a must read.  It is quite possibly the most ridiculous business idea I have ever heard.  And yet here a guy is, that has made$11,000+ so far.

    Basically Bart Centre started a business, Eternal Earth-Bound Pets, that is centered on the idea that atheists will not be taken when The Rapture happens and neither will pets.  This is how it is sold according to the Feb 22, 2010 issue of Business Week:

    “In this event, they say, the righteous will be spirited away to a better place while the godless remain on Earth.  But what will become of the pets?”

    And the website itself says:

    “The next best thing to pet salvation in a Post Rapture World.”

    “If you love your pets, I can’t understand how you could not consider this.”

    So everything about the site, including the name – Eternal Earth-Bound Pets – is focused on making pet owners feel bad that when The Rapture comes their pets will be left behind.  Thankfully for them, atheists will not be taken and, therefore, will still be around to take care of the pets.  But of course there is a fee for this.  $110 gets you a 10-year contract.  IF The Rapture happens in that time, the pets will be taken in by atheists approved by Eternal Earth-Bound Pets.  Otherwise you just burned you money, similar to any other insurance deal.

    It is very clear that Mr. Centre thinks that his customers are complete and total morons.  But, to his credit, the guy is completely upfront about his whole business plan:

    “I’m trying to figure out how to cash in on this hysteria to supplement my income.”

    “If we thought the Rapture was really going to happen, obviously our rate structure would be much higher.”

    I’m not sure how I feel about this whole thing.  On one hand it seems like the phrase “a sucker is born every minute” has never been more applicable.  On the other, if you really think that The Rapture will happen, and that your pets will not make the trip with you, this could ease your concern.

    It is the same thing that a tarot card reader, ghost communicator, or any ‘fortune teller’ relies on.  They, and perhaps their clients, know that they are completely making stuff up.  BUT, if, at the end of the day, the person with the ‘power’ has made the customer feel better, or given them hope, or given them something exciting to think about, has the person got their moneys worth?  I, for one, hate horror movies and cannot imagine why someone would pay to have themselves scared (and haunted mazes are only slightly better).  And yet there is no way that I can call the whole genre a scam because not everybody feels the same way, obviously.

    So do you have pet after-rapture insurance or is the whole thing a scam?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.


    Work The System; Don’t Be A Jerk

    January 26th, 2010

    I love to get a good deal. There are few things more pleasing than knowing that you were able to negotiate to a place where both you and the seller were comfortable with the agreement.  And despite what some may have you believe, a company really does want you as a customer; this is the case now more than ever.  So take your business elsewhere is you are unhappy, try and be reasonable, try to get a great deal if you can.  But don’t be a jerk about it.

    I recently had an experience with an online retailer that I have recently taken quite a liking to.  Martin & Osa is part of the American Eagle company.  You know kind of like Abercrombie and Hollister or Gap and Banana Republic (Old Navy too!).

    Anyway, they have a really great site that I like quite a bit.  It is easy to navigate and includes many great subtleties that  I won’t go into here but that I appreciate as a web analyst and novice usability analyst.  The other thing I like is that they have free shipping on orders over $100, they include clearance items in there % 0ff promotions, and they have free returns (you may have had to purchase over $100 to get that, I’m not sure).

    On New Year’s Day they ran a 20% off and Free Shipping (no min) promotion.  Like I said I really like some of their stuff so I loaded up on around $100 worth of stuff.  It arrived a few days ago and literally the same day then ran a 30% off promotion.  I checked online and they were still in stock of each item that I ordered.  I kind of felt ripped off.  Sure I was happy with the 20% off but then to contact me again with 30% off within a week.  On the same stuff?  It just rubbed me the wrong way.

    So I placed another order with them with the exact same items in the order and a few extra that I decided I could get with 30% off.  The plan was to just return all of the other stuff I purchased since I was getting the same stuff but with an extra 10% off.  But, being in the e-commerce business I know how much returns cost and shipping.  So I didn’t want to be a jerk and take advantage of their policies.

    I called up their 24 hour number (excellent job M&O!) and asked if I could just get the credit on the stuff I bought earlier and then cancel the whole new order.  Sadly, they cannot price match to a promotional price.  This probably makes sense in most cases because people wear the stuff they purchased (and take off tags) so they can’t return it anyway.  Since I just got my stuff I could still return it.  I was also a little sad (but understood) why they could not price match my full price shirt I bought at retail (and linked to my online acct. via email) that was just send to clearance for a $30 price reduction.  They could match it in store, but not over the phone.  Oh well.

    What I must say is that during this whole experience I valued his honesty.  He flat out told me to return the other stuff and keep the new order.  He answered each question without hesitation and was very clear in his answers.  Way to go Christian!  You did a great job.

    So the moral of the story is always try and get a good deal (like getting 30% off instead of 20%) but also be reasonable.  It didn’t work this time, but sometimes all you have to do is ask.  Oh and by the way, my second order was actually twice the size of my first order with 30% instead of 20% so I don’t think M&O did too badly in the whole thing.

    Do you love to get a great deal?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.


    Dissecting Jeremy Schoemaker

    January 20th, 2010

    Oh Shoemoney, you are a money making machine.  And while I don’t think you are a prodigy of some kind, it is fun to see you at work.  Let us take a closer look at the e-mail you sent out last week.

    Hi David,

    I can’t tell you how excited I am!

    The number of emails and calls I’ve been getting from people
    telling me how they can’t wait for the ShoeMoney System
    going live on the 26th, has been mind-boggling…

    We’re going to do a LIVE Chat  tomorrow, share more details
    about what’s inside the ShoeMoney System and answer all
    of your questions.
    Trust me, you’re going to be sorry if you miss this one…

    ******************************

    **

    SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT:
    Live Chat with Jeremy Schoemaker
    Thursday January 14, 2pm CT, 3pm EST
    ********************************

    IMPORTANT: We can only support 300 users in the room,
    so please signup now to reserve your spot.

    ==> http://www.shoemoneysystem.com/live-chat/

    See you tomorrow!

    ShoeMoney Media Group | 5550 S. 59th St., Ste 21 | Lincoln, NE 68516 | US
    Unsubscribe from future marketing messages from ShoeMoney Media Group

    I think the best way for me to review this is just in a simple list.  Now remember, Jeremy is a testing machine.  The structure of this e-mail is not an accident.  It is the result of many many tests with e-mail, or display advertising, or whatever advertising he does.  It is a highly optimized contact and it shows.  So here are 10 of the things that I picked up on:

    1. Personal greeting: “Hi David”
    2. Build curiosity…what is he excited about
    3. Say that everybody is already doing it, don’t feel left out.
    4. The system going live is “mind-boggling” implies that it is some how extraordinary.
    5. Answer all “your” questions not only personalizes it but shows he’s going to give something to you.
    6. “Special Announcement” which, interestingly, is the whole point of the e-mail so it’s really not so special.  But it sounds nice.
    7. Uses his full name to establish credibility.
    8. Has an arbitrary limit of 300 users.
    9. Have to sign up up so he captures e-mails (in case you pass the info on)
    10. “See you tomorrow” again makes you envision you will be there.

    It is amazing how much optimization and tricks you can put into a single e-mail.  Did you see any others?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.


    Thoughts On The Christmas “Bomber”

    December 29th, 2009

    Internet, I cannot help myself.  All of the talk around this guy that tried to blow up a plane is frustrating me to no end.  Nobody seems to want to apply an ounce of rational thought to the situation.  I have no idea why our ‘leaders’ are ignoring any relevant information.  I guess that’s just what politics are.

    Consider a few of the following topics that have been in the news:

    Republicans have hinted that there should have been a big red flag next to the suspect’s name….how [could] the suspected terrorist could fly in the first place after his own father had warned authorities his son was possibly under the influence of religious extremists.

    Well, let’s see.  I was listening to NPR and they had a guy on that said there are about 500,000 people on the watch list database but only 4,000 – 5,000 on the no fly list.  A single complaint from a father is not evidence to put someone on a no-fly list.  Wow!  That actually makes sense.  Score one for the FBI.  They don’t just randomly prevent people from traveling, they actually need evidence that they are a danger.  At least we are still of sound morals, despite what the supposedly ‘moral’ right would have us believe.  Hell, they may even want me on some watch list because I disagree with them.  Now if they would just ban anybody that is a religious extremist…oh wait, that would prevent some of themselves from flying.  Talk about a lack of research or any knowledge at all.

    Obama said: “Had the suspect succeeded in bringing down that plane, it could have killed nearly 300 passengers and crew — innocent civilians preparing to celebrate the holidays with their families and friends.”

    300 innocent people.  If they would have died that would have been tragic, for sure.  But how many people die every day in vehicles?  Well, so glad you asked.  The National Highway Traffic Saftey Administration has the answer for you.  In October of 2009 they released a report (link to PDF) that showed we were at record low traffic fatalities to start 2009!  We managed to get the rate down to 90+ people dead a day, with 16,600 dead through June!  Way to go USA!  So if we assume that more people travel during the holidays (and the death rate is deaths per 100 million miles traveled) then we may have had more people die over Christmas weekend on the road than if the guy would have blown the plane.  But this gets no mention.  Nothing is ever put in context with other issues.

    Would it have been possible to prevent this guy from getting on a plane?  Yeah, I am sure it would be.  We’d have to burn our already partially scorched Constitution, but we could do it.  People complain about insurance companies reaping mounds and mounds of profits and yet who can rationally blame them.  We are in a culture that is fearful of everything.  People are willing to sacrifice everything to live “safely”.  So we buy insurance of all types, give up our privacy, and submit to what would once be considered clear violations of personal freedoms.

    Meanwhile we ignore the clear dangers of driving (1.19 deaths per 100 million miles) and a multitude of other activities while pretending that terrorism is the biggest threat that we’ve ever faced.  It is far too easy to quote people, and yet I will do it anyway (from TenthAmendmentCenter):

    The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. ~ James Madison

    A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have. ~ Thomas Jefferson / Gerald Ford

    I think the TSA is far more of a danger to our Constitution than terrorists will ever be.  I am sure other disagree.  And I respect that people want to be safe.  But what is missing is the element of common sense, and I just can’t get over that.  A fact that I am reminded of every time I travel and see the TSA confiscate something.  I mean really, if they think the liquid is dangerous, shouldn’t they treat it as an explosive instead of just throwing it in the trash.  Or take away “weapons” but give real silverware in First Class.  My only fear is that some idiot at the TSA will read this and instead of applying logic to see how silly they are and how they are not making us safer they will see an opportunity to further tighten the straps while thinking “silly civilians, liberties are for kids”.

    Would you rather have the illusion of safety or less hassle when you fly?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.


    Why I Dislike iTunes And XBox Marketplace

    December 1st, 2009

    It is no secret that virtual goods are a hard sell for me; I need to get something not easily duplicated for my money.  After my first post Fantasy7 made the argument that people buy a Facebook gift for the experience.  They buy it for the joy of giving and for the joy of receiving.  A similar argument was made for in-game items for games such as Word of Warcraft.  Again, I understand this.  Which is why I then wrote a second post to address these issues.

    Again Fantasy7 was back, pushing for virtual goods.  That music and games could be passed on.  That an e-book had just as much value as a book on the shelf you don’t read.  If you don’t intend to resell it they have the same value.  While, for me, this is an argument that is on rather thin ice I at least understand where Fantasy7 is coming from.  But I am not convinced and today I will make another case against virtual goods.

    I believe some of the views toward virtual goods are shortsighted.  In reality, one can never know how long they will want something.  This is why craigslist become a hit quickly and why rummage sales will never go out of style.  At some point in time you will have stuff that is either no longer of value to you either because it is junk or too worn/old for you.  At such a point one could just throw it away.  Or one could gift it.  Or recycle it.

    Lets take one example most people can get on board with, a car.  A car is not something that one generally just throws away.  Nor is it something that is generally just gifted – though I do recognize that children may get one as a gift.  I think everyone can get on board with the idea that trashing or gifting a car is not the most common thing to do with it.  Even though the goal is to get rid of the car, people still sell it because it retains some value in some way, even if it is just for parts.  The physical item has value and always will, if only as scrap metal.  It may have too small of a value for the owner to do anything but trash it, but there is still value, however small.

    Now to my point.  Digital goods only have value to the original seller.  If this is not the case, can someone please show me where I can sell my iTunes songs I don’t want?  Or where to unload my XBox Marketplace download of the original Halo?  Only iTunes and Xbox make money in these spaces.  Not the case with purchased games where I have a physical, non-easily reproducible copy of the game.  Yes it is a copy of some original source code, but there is the case, manual, artwork, etc. that are not easily copied.  If you buy an iTunes song or movie it does not take much to make a copy, copyright protected or not.

    My larger point is that any virtual good that you purchase  is a sunk cost.  End of story.  This is simply not the case with physical goods.  Forget the arguments about worth and experience and all that.  Even Fantasy7 can’t argue with the statement that a virtual game or song is a sunk cost (it may be different for online game merchandise, though as soon as the multi-player server goes offline, the player is left with nothing, no matter how much real money they spent).  It is simply a fact.  And this is why I will always prefer a physical good with any purchase I make.  I cannot predict the future, nor can any of you, so why not keep my options open.  The physical will always retain value.

    So what prompted this post?  I was going to throw away some old XBox games.  But, I checked online to see if they were worth something.  Anything I could get for them would be gravy since the plan was to junk them.  And believe it or not, Amazon is selling WWE Raw 2 for $89.94.  Others list it new at $29.99 and used at $7.76.

    It’s not much but it is a free lunch.  Assume that you have just the download from Xbox Live Marketplace.  Who’s paying for your lunch?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.


    Why Free Content Isn’t Free

    November 20th, 2009

    Advertising.  That is the motto of seemingly every business you hear of today.  They will provide a service that is free to the customer and it will be supported by advertising.  Even Twitter said today that they will be launching an advertising business soon.  Fine.  I get it.  There is tons of money to be made with advertising.  Look no more than the post on Shoemoney where Jeremy says that:

    We allocated them a small budget of like 100k for a week and they did incredible.

    A SMALL budget of $100,000 per WEEK.  Yeah, there is money to be made in advertising space on your product/blog.  It is a great idea.  I have ads on this blog to help offset the cost of running it.  Hey, if it works that is great.  And best of all?  The consumer gets the content free.  Right?

    Well, that really all depends on your definition of free.  You get a discount at your local supermarket when you swipe your shopper card.  You earn rewards on your credit or debit card.  You get to use a product and it costs you nothing.  But one must stop for a moment and think about what is really happening.

    Business are generally not in business to be a charity.  Otherwise they would be a charity; that’s how these things work.  So that means that whatever strategy they are employing at the current moment is probably set up so that the company makes money.

    Now of course there are two sides to every coin.  You swipe your shopping card to get a discount.  The company collects the data and learns from it.  They place things near each other to cross sell.  Is this a service – they want to make it easier to shop.  Or is it trickery – you will buy both items even though you only need one item.

    The same is true with credit card loyalty programs.  Of course you get rewards so you are happy, but the company is also collecting data on you buying habits – maybe to send you offers in the mail.  Like the stuffers that come in some bills.  You don’t really think that stuff is all random do you?  (well, it might be, but not if the company is properly leveraging the data)

    And of course the ads for free services.  Even if you never click them, you see them.  They are the billboards of the internet.  You just have to trust that the display advertising works (or test into it).  They are impacting your perception of the brand or at least keeping it top of mind.

    Perhaps these are trade-offs that you willingly make.  Maybe you think you are the exception and don’t see it all.  That may be the case, but there are lots and lots of ever increasingly sophisticated way to trick your brain.  What our brains react to, how they work, what areas are activated when image A is viewed vs. image B.  Really, there are places doing consumer research where they are actively scanning the brain of the volunteer while they participate in the study.

    It is a very interesting, but possibly scary field – for the consumer.  So when you see all of these ad supported things and think it’s just free, consider what you are actually selling to get it.  Yourself.  And as the techniques get increasingly intelligent, the idea of ads everywhere gets increasingly uncomfortable.

    What do you think about all the ads?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.


    Lands End Canvas

    November 12th, 2009

    Branding.  It is a very interesting thing; it is what the people associate with a product.  This seems simple enough, but all in all, it is a very odd concept.  The legal system allows for one to sue for defamation, so one would assume that this means that somebody must own the reputation.  But can you really own a reputation?

    I mean, reputation is just a collection of other people’s thoughts about you.  Can you really own that?  Then you are asserting you own other people’s opinion.  It is all very odd.  But it is all very important.

    That is why today is a very special day for Lands End, my employer.  Today was the official launch day of the new brand called Lands End Canvas.  It has some very interesting clothing coming from Lands End.  I think that this is a great step for Lands’ End.  It speaks to our vision for the future and a new avenue to reach our customers.

    I wish LE Canvas the best of luck.  Obviously I will not be able to give any updates on it here, but keep your ears and eyes open and you just may come across it.  I have already got my order and will be sure to share my thoughts on it with you.  But no matter how it turns out, it is an exciting next step for LE.

    What do you think of the LE Canvas site?  And check out the My Canvas section when it’s live!


    The Case For The Leagalization Of Cannabis

    October 28th, 2009

    180px-HerbalThis is a very interesting topic that was brought to front of mind due to a recent Fortune magazine article on it.  Actually, it made the front cover.  I think that the article was very well written and, furthermore, I thought I should chime in.

    I think the case for legalization of cannabis is crystal clear for very simple reasons.  And if someone can refute my points below in any reasonable manner, then I may reconsider.

    First I will hit on the two most obvious points for the legalization of cannabis:

    • Cannabis, in any form – smoking to brownies, is not as addictive as cigarettes and cigarettes are legal.
    • Cannabis, in any form – alters your mind  to no greater extent than alcohol does and alcohol is legal.

    So beyond the issue of individual rights (or the ties to racial and ethnic fears that led to the criminalization), which is a whole different topic, cannabis should be legal for no other reason than that we currently allow other drugs that are both more addictive, more mind-altering, and worse for you with the only requirement to getting them being your age.  How does this make sense?

    It seems to me that if one wants cannabis to be illegal they would also have to be against both alcohol and tobacco.  How could they be for either of those drugs and against cannabis and not be a complete hypocrite?  But let us not stop there, and explore a bit more.

    Then there are other arguments, such as the violence surrounding cannabis.  Somehow these people must be forgetting the prohibition era in the early 1900’s where cannabis wasn’t the problem but alcohol.  The very drug that gave LOTS of money to mobsters and gangs and was the cause of countless acts of violence.  So I must ask again, how is the prohibition of cannabis different than the one against alcohol?  Why are we trying the same thing (prohibition) and expecting different results?  I just don’t get it.

    Okay, so that’s not the reason, but there must be one.  How about the fact that it is a ‘gateway drug’ to other drugs.  Interesting idea but it fails for the same reason as the other arguments, a double standard.  Just because alcohol and tobacco are not illegal does not make them any less of a drug.  So then, if cannabis is a gateway drug, what does that make tobacco and alcohol?  Anybody using harder drugs probably is using those two drugs at least as much as cannabis (but probably a lot more) and arguably at an earlier age too.

    And as if we needed any additional icing on the cakes, there is the health aspect.  No, I’m not even talking about the medical uses that our government knows about (and actually dispenses cannabis to people – yes the US gov has a program that dispenses medical cannabis).  Beyond that blatant hypocrisy (as if we needed another example) one can just look at four additional facts:

    1. In 1988 Judge Francis Young stated: “Marijuana…is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man” when ruling on a marijuana case.  It is basically impossible to overdose on cannabis, unlike alcohol that kills binge drinkers and alcoholics every year.
    2. Many studies (according to Fortune) also say that smoking cannabis (which there are many other ways to consume than smoking) is less detrimental to health than smoking tobacco – no hard proof that it causes lung cancer exists yet.
    3. Marinol, a synthetic version of the active psychoactive agent of cannabis, was approved by the FDA in 1986, further verifying that it has legitimate medical uses.
    4. When marijuana was criminalized in 1937 it was done “over the objection of the American Medical Association“.

    As one final point (last one I promise) the money aspect comes up.  From Fortune 9/28 p. 148:

    Assuming a national consumer market for marijuana of about $13 billion annually, Harvard economist Jeffery Miron has estimated that legalization could be expected to bring in state and federal governments about $7 billion annually in additional tax revenue, while saving them $13.5 billion in prohibition related law enforcement costs.

    That’s an estimated $20.5 BILLION in additional money for any number of activities, including law enforcement on the very gangs that that money would have been going to.

    Knowing all of this, does anyone have any ideas why it should be illegal?   I’m just plain baffled.

    This has been a Thought From the Cake Scraps.


    Throw Pillows And Business

    June 12th, 2009

    throw_pillowsaaIf you’re like me, you see a bed full of pillows and wonder what the purpose of all of them could possibly be.  After all, if one were to use the bed, all of the pillows would have to be removed and the put back on after the cat nap.  It is very easy to think that the extra pillows have no purpose.  But, I have found that there is a very subtle error in this way of thinking.

    Many things are not designed with practicality in mind.  Yes, the widget has to accomplish the job it was made for, but it also has to look good doing it.  Here again you may argue that as long as it gets the job done, it doesn’t matter; again I have to say that there is an error in that logic.

    The common error between the throw pillows and the widget examples is that it ignores that instant judgment that people make upon viewing the object.  The reality is that many, if not all, people judge a book by its cover.  Knowing that, it is easy to see how this ties into business.

    The experience that people have with your product matters, the story it tells matters.  What is often overlooked is that this extends beyond the product to the company itself.  This includes everything form retail locations to corporate headquarters.  Money has to be spent to preserve the experience and the brand image.

    I have a great example.  Out at Lands’ End headquarters in Wisconsin we have both offices and a distribution center.  View_from_2nd_peninsula_hillOut in the back there is an area where semi trailers are parked that are not being used.  I have not idea how much space, but it can hold a few.  What I noticed on a run the other day is that there is a big grass mound/hill between the offices and this parking area.  It has been there for a long time, but how much did it cost to build it?  I have no idea, but it also makes me wonder, how many people decided to work for Lands’ End, or how many vendors gave a better deal, or how much business has been done because of a great experience on the campus.  An experience that was great, in part, because they saw a beautiful grassy hillside with trees instead of parked semi trailers.

    That is why as much as I wonder why a business would pay for an office in downtown NYC or why people spend what they do on nice suits, or why a company does what might be considered ‘fat cat’ spending on things such as landscaping, art, architecture, and the like…as much as I wonder about all of that and as much as people love to criticize it I think at the end of the day it matters.

    People will argue until they are blue in the face that they would like to just have something that gets the job done and that all that spending is wasteful.  Mostly this is because we want to believe that we are completely rational and don’t make ’shallow’ decisions.  But as much as we would like to believe this, it is simply not true.

    What do you think about throw pillows?

    This has been a Thought From The Cake Scraps.