A wierd date on the calendar for me, Ive been here for 5 years now. Wierd because, if I worked out the arithmatics, thats as long as I have lived in Vancouver. AND thats also about 5 times longer than I thought I was going to actually stay here. 5 times longer! Honestly, thats a significant multiplication factor on early estimates: I couldn't of been more off if I was trying to hit the ocean with rock, but was aiming towards Saskatchewan. Maybe its time to go (but, I say that every year). Its at this point where I would love to possess such intangibles as "Plans", "Goals" and "Career Direction". And heres some random notes:
- FAO Schwartz is now owned by Toys R Us. They better not put Geoffery the Giraffe in front, or Ill never buy Toys ever again.
- In somewhat related news, GM stock is now trading under $1. And Fiat, the famous Italian Fix It Again Tony's cars, will soon become the 2nd largest automobile company in the world, next to Toyota. Like what the? Thats like the Indian Tata Car corporation starting to outselling Honda.
- I wonder what is the percentage of people that plug their ears when they are sitting in a public toilet stall, and then hear someone occupy the stall next to them. Toilets should be installed with Bose Noise Canceling Earphones.
- I was on a hike with my buddy Tolan, and he was telling me how his dad still calls him at random annoying hours, asking for instructions on how to do something on the internet. Once, his dad did take lessons at the local community center, but that didnt work because Sisters of the local convent ran those community classes, and ignored that section of the computer lessons since they insisted there is too much evil on the internet. Maybe they have a point. You know the percentage of people that probably watch porn on the Internet? Id say probably 98%.
- On another related note, on that hike, I realized I absolutely need Goretex hiking shoes.
boa noite
Friday, May 29, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Where Amazing Happens..
This is class. I love this... quite possibly the most beautiful things ever ...
Monday, May 18, 2009
Definition of a Chick Flick?
The other day, About a Boy was on Irish network Television, RTE2, came upon it surprisingly, or rather, serendipitously (better word, huh). I own the DVD, but as we all seem to know, when it comes to classic favorite movies, no matter how many times you've seen them, they still seem even more special when they are on TV; there is something extra significant about the situation, a magnetic appeal that makes it very difficult to change the channel or leave the room. Add to that, I havent actually seen it in maybe 3 years, so I forgot all the good bits. It was a good day.
Watching About a Boy, and considering its appeal as a romantic comedy, it brought up again an argument from the Xmas Holiday: What defines a Chick Flick?
There was an on going argument with Nina, Crystal and Jill during our stay in Prague and they started it by proclaiming something completely wrong as if it were fact: They said that Love Actually ( the movie that we had scheduled to watch at the apartment for our christmas celebration) was a chick flick.
And I said, Oh no. Hells no. Vehemenently no. I proceeded to make my case passionately and logically, and not to worry, I ended up demolishing them in debate. And I needed to argue this because Love Actually is one of my favorite movies, and hells no way that one of my favorite movies is going to be a chick flick. No way Jose, Calderon.
Why isnt Love Actually a generic Chick Flick? Well because of one simple truth: its lacks a predominating female point of view. Romantic movies and the chick flick genre have always, ALWAYS had at heart a female narrative or at the very least a 50% share with a male lead. This definition highlights the main difference between shows like Sex and the City, from lets say, Entourage. Sex and the City: nothing but female point of view (askew). Entourage: not a single female view in sight, unless being objectified. Another example would be the difference between Big and Sleepless in the Seattle. Both star Tom Hanks, both rely on situational relationship related comedy, but in Sleepless in Seattle, Tom Hanks shares billing with Meg Ryan, and both of their stories are told simultaneously with equal weight. In Big, its only Josh Baskins and his wonderful foot Piano scene in FAO Schwartz (one of the most monumental scenes of the cinematic archives ). The result is: One is a chick flick, and one is not. Now finally, returning to the subject of my first paragraph, theres About a Boy. Even though it stars Rom-Com all star point guard Hugh Grant in a movie about relationships, no one would ever say it was chick flick. Because, well, its about a boy.
As for Love Actually, which is a collection of linear stories that associate with each other loosely in the end, almost every story arc is seen from the males point of view. There's the video camera bloke who fell in love with his bestfriend's wife, Keira Knightley. There's Colin Firths character who gets cheated on, then falls for a portuguese cleaner that he doesnt even know how to speak to. There's Billy Nighs old rocker comeback story, trying to find something meaningful. There's the bug-eyed lad who goes to the Wisconsin to find American girls. Theres Hugh Grants prime minister character, falling for the tea server girl with thunder thighs. And then there is Liam Neeson's cute story arc with his step son, who falls madly in love at the precocious age of 10. And what's left, there is only the Husband and Wife story of Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson, plus the Laura Linney tangential storyline that could be considered female leveraged. This is not enough, too much of a minority. In the end Love Actually is not a chick flick. Its not. If you still think so, try this: name one Chick Flick that doesnt revolve around female character. It doesnt exist. Crystal, who was stumped when I posed the question, even started making up movies. She even used foreign language movies, like the Korean 'My Sassy Girl'; like that even exists. Please..
Watching About a Boy, and considering its appeal as a romantic comedy, it brought up again an argument from the Xmas Holiday: What defines a Chick Flick?
There was an on going argument with Nina, Crystal and Jill during our stay in Prague and they started it by proclaiming something completely wrong as if it were fact: They said that Love Actually ( the movie that we had scheduled to watch at the apartment for our christmas celebration) was a chick flick.
And I said, Oh no. Hells no. Vehemenently no. I proceeded to make my case passionately and logically, and not to worry, I ended up demolishing them in debate. And I needed to argue this because Love Actually is one of my favorite movies, and hells no way that one of my favorite movies is going to be a chick flick. No way Jose, Calderon.
Why isnt Love Actually a generic Chick Flick? Well because of one simple truth: its lacks a predominating female point of view. Romantic movies and the chick flick genre have always, ALWAYS had at heart a female narrative or at the very least a 50% share with a male lead. This definition highlights the main difference between shows like Sex and the City, from lets say, Entourage. Sex and the City: nothing but female point of view (askew). Entourage: not a single female view in sight, unless being objectified. Another example would be the difference between Big and Sleepless in the Seattle. Both star Tom Hanks, both rely on situational relationship related comedy, but in Sleepless in Seattle, Tom Hanks shares billing with Meg Ryan, and both of their stories are told simultaneously with equal weight. In Big, its only Josh Baskins and his wonderful foot Piano scene in FAO Schwartz (one of the most monumental scenes of the cinematic archives ). The result is: One is a chick flick, and one is not. Now finally, returning to the subject of my first paragraph, theres About a Boy. Even though it stars Rom-Com all star point guard Hugh Grant in a movie about relationships, no one would ever say it was chick flick. Because, well, its about a boy.
As for Love Actually, which is a collection of linear stories that associate with each other loosely in the end, almost every story arc is seen from the males point of view. There's the video camera bloke who fell in love with his bestfriend's wife, Keira Knightley. There's Colin Firths character who gets cheated on, then falls for a portuguese cleaner that he doesnt even know how to speak to. There's Billy Nighs old rocker comeback story, trying to find something meaningful. There's the bug-eyed lad who goes to the Wisconsin to find American girls. Theres Hugh Grants prime minister character, falling for the tea server girl with thunder thighs. And then there is Liam Neeson's cute story arc with his step son, who falls madly in love at the precocious age of 10. And what's left, there is only the Husband and Wife story of Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson, plus the Laura Linney tangential storyline that could be considered female leveraged. This is not enough, too much of a minority. In the end Love Actually is not a chick flick. Its not. If you still think so, try this: name one Chick Flick that doesnt revolve around female character. It doesnt exist. Crystal, who was stumped when I posed the question, even started making up movies. She even used foreign language movies, like the Korean 'My Sassy Girl'; like that even exists. Please..
Sunday, May 10, 2009
The Abercrombie Index
Have you ever heard of the Big Mac Index? Its a measure used frequently in global economics, more specifically made famous by the Economist magazine. Essentially, its a simplified yet highly accurate way to compare the complex and volatile world of purchasing value or purchasing power in different countries as they relate to each other. Or, in other words, its a surprisingly easy way to find out if a certain country's currency is over valued or under valued, and does this by comparing the price of Big Macs in different places.
The premise is quite basic: take the cost of a Big Mac in one country: say, oh I dont know, for the sake of argument, lets randomly select Ireland. In Ireland a Big Mac cost 3.40 euros. In dollars, at current exchange rates that translates about 4.40 USD. Now if you were to buy a Big Mac in Chicago, it would cost 3.50 USD. Since we are baselined by the fact you are comparing the price of the exact same product, by the exact same company, with the exact same supply chain models, the only variable is the regional economics, and therefore, now easy to compare which location is over valued and which is under valued. The Irish Big Mac costs more. So Ireland in general terms is over valued as a country. Easy peasy, japanesey.
And if you want to get into more specifics, by comparing the ratio of the prices, to the actual exchange rate, you can then establish concrete index values; but I shouldnt bring up any more maths in this posts... itll get too confusing, and feel too much like a math / econ class. And really, who needs that kind of detail, there is a reason why there is a direct correlation between mathematics subjects and sedative potency. Just as long as you get the gist: by using the idea of a Big Mac, you can "Index" the true relative strength of a localized currency, especially in comparison to other locations. You can then contrast the relative purchasing parity of different countries, or for that matter, different local regions or even specifically, the cities themselves. And , if you wish to get really complex, you can translate it to the strength of the macro-economy, too. All from the primary cost of an ordinary Big Mac.
Anyways, so here I am in Bangor Maine today... shopping at Bangor Mall, which had both Abercrombie & Fitch and Hollister Co. stores. Most people who have shopped in the States are well aware of these two iconic fashion clothing outfits. They apply quite an effective and unique business model: turn your shopping experience into a night club type experience. Establish a modern interior design which is contemporary yet trendy, then make it consistent from store to store. Lower the lights really low, with specific spotlights on only the strategic areas that need highlighting, so that everywhere else its hard to judge if something looks good, much akin to the phenomenon of beer googles. Then play music, good modern music with a groovy beat, loud. Very loud. Like on the dial, it would be well past 'elevator music' notch or even the 'HMV' notch. With everything combined, a shopper is simply overwhelmed by the atmosphere; the restricted sight, and restricted hearing, creating a location of eliteness and exclusivity. Atmosphere and environment is essential to the consumer industry, and its the sole reason why Circuit City failed and Best Buy succeeded. And its a main reason why Abercrombie kills American Eagle in terms of brand value, even though the clothes in both stores are almost the same. Its to a great advantage to create a domain people enjoy to visit. And of course, add the bog standard that every consumer retailer should apply , you must have good looking people work there. Good looking girls, more specifically, for my interests (the guys... ehh. They might as well be light posts, really, I dont notice, but according to female friends, hot guys are key to shopping. So, even though all girls are crazy and evil, in this case I have to kinda believe them. Because in general girls shop more than guys. Well guys not named Noli). Why is this, since it sounds so discriminate and unfair? Well first of all, life is unfair, so we all kinda have to live with it. And also, in more politically expedient terms, for fashion retailers, your employees are the brand representatives... which is actually just another term for 'Model'. And to be completely fair, by law and rule, there are hardly any ugly models. To that extent the modern Ambercrombie has mastered this business concept, and hits all and every button.
In some cases, like the store In New York, on Fifth Avenue, they take the Ambercrombie / nightclub concept and bring it to amusing levels. Theres like lineups outside the store just to get in! and the good looking brand representatives / "models"? They dance like go go dancers would at certain stations! And the jeans are even stacked, organised and presented behind a bar... with like a bartender type guy to take your order. And on 5th Ave, the brand representatives slash "models" are soooooo hot. Like hot hot. Really smokin hot. So hot, you cant even phantom hitting on them because you wouldnt have the closest chance. Thats Abercrombie NY.
Bangor Maine though, in terms of the attractiveness of the Abercrombie girls there: just okay. Better than the Abercrombie I visited in Louisiana last month, and Wisconsin last year, but less than the one in Seattle and Dallas, and no where near the quality in Chicago or New York.They even had some, not so good looking ones in the back too, which is yet another Abercrombie patented move: all the charity hires are restricted to the WAY back, with probably an electronic collar that zaps them with voltage if they venture past the dressing room vicinity. If you have a really good Abercrombie store, these situations wont even exist. The local talent pool is rich enough, that the store management doesnt even need to venture down that avenue of woe.
So, after 6 paragraphs of setting the table and building up my eventual premise, I finally get around to my big idea and revelation: taking the lead of Ronald Macdonald's economics, why not use the same concepts and fundamentals to create a 'Abercrombie Index' to rate the relative "hotness" of the local region? Much like the Big Mac, we are taking a common product, from a common company, with the only variable attributed to the local area conditions of the store's location. Its well established that Abercrombie and Hollister hire with a heavy heavy HEAVY bias towards the hot people. So the natural progressive argument would then mean that each Abercrombie store would be a direct indicator of the quantity and quality of hot girls in the area (or hot guys too, I guess, but for the sake of brevity Ill continue to stick to the girls). See, if the local pond was poor... you'd know by who worked at the Abercrombie or Hollister. The greeters up front might top out at a 6.5, and there would be more regularity towards charity hires towards the back. And if the local area was really good, like say the more affluent areas of big city, then the greeters are so drop dead gorgeous that they make you cry, and the back area situation isnt even close to approaching bad dream status. See what I mean? Abercrombie and Fitch used as a scale for the key measure of territorial attractiveness. All in all, this new Index, its a rock solid, I think. And valuable, too. Comparing multiple areas as a new place to relocate for work or school? You better check out the Abercrombie Index. Disregard it at your peril.
For added breadth, this index concept can be extended to other areas as well. Jill, for example, prides herself for being offered a job at the Abercrombie in Seattle a couple times. This is another Abercrombie classic: take your pickings from people who shop at your store; if they are "Abercrombie Material', offer them a job. The reason for this is basic, really. Its like girlfriend / boyfriend scouting, but even easier. In this case: Abercrombie doesnt have to go anywhere because there is a wealth of foot traffic that comes to them. As a convenient byproduct it also bypasses any "fair hiring" laws that may exist if an opening was posted publicly. Now, if we were to apply my Abercrombie Index, how would Jill's Seattle job offer compare to the similar job offer Lisa ended up getting while shopping at Abercrombie NY when we were there last August? Without any existing standard to set against, you'd mistakenly believe it would be equal. But if you were to apply the Index, because of the relative mathematics, on paper the NYC offer in complimentary terms is more valuable. All things being equal, Lisa can currently claim more bragging rights. Just like how Rock always beats Scissors, New York on this index always beats Seattle. This will hold true up until, that is, Jill gets her eventual Abercrombie NYC job offer, one of these days, since she conveniently lives there now. If that happens, then she can hypothetically take the lead solely based on quantity. But then and only then. The index says so. (In completely unrelated news, I have a feeling I have started a new healthy competition). Moreover, if you were savy enough, its a weighted achievement that can be highlighted on your resume. "It says here that you have experience being spontaneously offered a brand rep. position in Abercrombie and Fitch. May I ask which one?" "Manhattan Fifth Avenue." "Wow... impressive..".
But in the end, it serves my purpose, because when people ask me travel type questions, like, "how was Bangor?" I can now say with all confidence.. "Well, it was a solid 7 on the Abercrombie Index" and peeps would get a perfect picture of what the town was like. And if the local area doesnt even have a Abercrombie store? Well then, that kinda answers the question by itself. Like if the area wasnt even Abercrombie worthy, it doesnt bode well for the town status prospects. (Outside of the States, however, my arrogant judgement doesnt apply, because Abercrombie corporate has hardly expanded outside of the USA, with the exception of Toronto and London, England. Just some legal copy, required so that Im not liable for any potential law suits from anyone outside of the States found unfairly insulted)
My Ambercrombie current Index table:
New York Fifth Ave: 9.5
Chicago: 8.5
Dallas: 8.5
Seattle: 8
San Francisco: 7.5
Bangor, ME: 7
Green Bay, WI: 6.5
Columbus, OH: 6.5
Shreveport, LA: 5.0
Its a work in progress. Unfortunately, my sample population is underwhelming because my American travel has been mostly limited to Southern hick towns.
The premise is quite basic: take the cost of a Big Mac in one country: say, oh I dont know, for the sake of argument, lets randomly select Ireland. In Ireland a Big Mac cost 3.40 euros. In dollars, at current exchange rates that translates about 4.40 USD. Now if you were to buy a Big Mac in Chicago, it would cost 3.50 USD. Since we are baselined by the fact you are comparing the price of the exact same product, by the exact same company, with the exact same supply chain models, the only variable is the regional economics, and therefore, now easy to compare which location is over valued and which is under valued. The Irish Big Mac costs more. So Ireland in general terms is over valued as a country. Easy peasy, japanesey.
And if you want to get into more specifics, by comparing the ratio of the prices, to the actual exchange rate, you can then establish concrete index values; but I shouldnt bring up any more maths in this posts... itll get too confusing, and feel too much like a math / econ class. And really, who needs that kind of detail, there is a reason why there is a direct correlation between mathematics subjects and sedative potency. Just as long as you get the gist: by using the idea of a Big Mac, you can "Index" the true relative strength of a localized currency, especially in comparison to other locations. You can then contrast the relative purchasing parity of different countries, or for that matter, different local regions or even specifically, the cities themselves. And , if you wish to get really complex, you can translate it to the strength of the macro-economy, too. All from the primary cost of an ordinary Big Mac.
Anyways, so here I am in Bangor Maine today... shopping at Bangor Mall, which had both Abercrombie & Fitch and Hollister Co. stores. Most people who have shopped in the States are well aware of these two iconic fashion clothing outfits. They apply quite an effective and unique business model: turn your shopping experience into a night club type experience. Establish a modern interior design which is contemporary yet trendy, then make it consistent from store to store. Lower the lights really low, with specific spotlights on only the strategic areas that need highlighting, so that everywhere else its hard to judge if something looks good, much akin to the phenomenon of beer googles. Then play music, good modern music with a groovy beat, loud. Very loud. Like on the dial, it would be well past 'elevator music' notch or even the 'HMV' notch. With everything combined, a shopper is simply overwhelmed by the atmosphere; the restricted sight, and restricted hearing, creating a location of eliteness and exclusivity. Atmosphere and environment is essential to the consumer industry, and its the sole reason why Circuit City failed and Best Buy succeeded. And its a main reason why Abercrombie kills American Eagle in terms of brand value, even though the clothes in both stores are almost the same. Its to a great advantage to create a domain people enjoy to visit. And of course, add the bog standard that every consumer retailer should apply , you must have good looking people work there. Good looking girls, more specifically, for my interests (the guys... ehh. They might as well be light posts, really, I dont notice, but according to female friends, hot guys are key to shopping. So, even though all girls are crazy and evil, in this case I have to kinda believe them. Because in general girls shop more than guys. Well guys not named Noli). Why is this, since it sounds so discriminate and unfair? Well first of all, life is unfair, so we all kinda have to live with it. And also, in more politically expedient terms, for fashion retailers, your employees are the brand representatives... which is actually just another term for 'Model'. And to be completely fair, by law and rule, there are hardly any ugly models. To that extent the modern Ambercrombie has mastered this business concept, and hits all and every button.
In some cases, like the store In New York, on Fifth Avenue, they take the Ambercrombie / nightclub concept and bring it to amusing levels. Theres like lineups outside the store just to get in! and the good looking brand representatives / "models"? They dance like go go dancers would at certain stations! And the jeans are even stacked, organised and presented behind a bar... with like a bartender type guy to take your order. And on 5th Ave, the brand representatives slash "models" are soooooo hot. Like hot hot. Really smokin hot. So hot, you cant even phantom hitting on them because you wouldnt have the closest chance. Thats Abercrombie NY.
Bangor Maine though, in terms of the attractiveness of the Abercrombie girls there: just okay. Better than the Abercrombie I visited in Louisiana last month, and Wisconsin last year, but less than the one in Seattle and Dallas, and no where near the quality in Chicago or New York.They even had some, not so good looking ones in the back too, which is yet another Abercrombie patented move: all the charity hires are restricted to the WAY back, with probably an electronic collar that zaps them with voltage if they venture past the dressing room vicinity. If you have a really good Abercrombie store, these situations wont even exist. The local talent pool is rich enough, that the store management doesnt even need to venture down that avenue of woe.
So, after 6 paragraphs of setting the table and building up my eventual premise, I finally get around to my big idea and revelation: taking the lead of Ronald Macdonald's economics, why not use the same concepts and fundamentals to create a 'Abercrombie Index' to rate the relative "hotness" of the local region? Much like the Big Mac, we are taking a common product, from a common company, with the only variable attributed to the local area conditions of the store's location. Its well established that Abercrombie and Hollister hire with a heavy heavy HEAVY bias towards the hot people. So the natural progressive argument would then mean that each Abercrombie store would be a direct indicator of the quantity and quality of hot girls in the area (or hot guys too, I guess, but for the sake of brevity Ill continue to stick to the girls). See, if the local pond was poor... you'd know by who worked at the Abercrombie or Hollister. The greeters up front might top out at a 6.5, and there would be more regularity towards charity hires towards the back. And if the local area was really good, like say the more affluent areas of big city, then the greeters are so drop dead gorgeous that they make you cry, and the back area situation isnt even close to approaching bad dream status. See what I mean? Abercrombie and Fitch used as a scale for the key measure of territorial attractiveness. All in all, this new Index, its a rock solid, I think. And valuable, too. Comparing multiple areas as a new place to relocate for work or school? You better check out the Abercrombie Index. Disregard it at your peril.
For added breadth, this index concept can be extended to other areas as well. Jill, for example, prides herself for being offered a job at the Abercrombie in Seattle a couple times. This is another Abercrombie classic: take your pickings from people who shop at your store; if they are "Abercrombie Material', offer them a job. The reason for this is basic, really. Its like girlfriend / boyfriend scouting, but even easier. In this case: Abercrombie doesnt have to go anywhere because there is a wealth of foot traffic that comes to them. As a convenient byproduct it also bypasses any "fair hiring" laws that may exist if an opening was posted publicly. Now, if we were to apply my Abercrombie Index, how would Jill's Seattle job offer compare to the similar job offer Lisa ended up getting while shopping at Abercrombie NY when we were there last August? Without any existing standard to set against, you'd mistakenly believe it would be equal. But if you were to apply the Index, because of the relative mathematics, on paper the NYC offer in complimentary terms is more valuable. All things being equal, Lisa can currently claim more bragging rights. Just like how Rock always beats Scissors, New York on this index always beats Seattle. This will hold true up until, that is, Jill gets her eventual Abercrombie NYC job offer, one of these days, since she conveniently lives there now. If that happens, then she can hypothetically take the lead solely based on quantity. But then and only then. The index says so. (In completely unrelated news, I have a feeling I have started a new healthy competition). Moreover, if you were savy enough, its a weighted achievement that can be highlighted on your resume. "It says here that you have experience being spontaneously offered a brand rep. position in Abercrombie and Fitch. May I ask which one?" "Manhattan Fifth Avenue." "Wow... impressive..".
But in the end, it serves my purpose, because when people ask me travel type questions, like, "how was Bangor?" I can now say with all confidence.. "Well, it was a solid 7 on the Abercrombie Index" and peeps would get a perfect picture of what the town was like. And if the local area doesnt even have a Abercrombie store? Well then, that kinda answers the question by itself. Like if the area wasnt even Abercrombie worthy, it doesnt bode well for the town status prospects. (Outside of the States, however, my arrogant judgement doesnt apply, because Abercrombie corporate has hardly expanded outside of the USA, with the exception of Toronto and London, England. Just some legal copy, required so that Im not liable for any potential law suits from anyone outside of the States found unfairly insulted)
My Ambercrombie current Index table:
New York Fifth Ave: 9.5
Chicago: 8.5
Dallas: 8.5
Seattle: 8
San Francisco: 7.5
Bangor, ME: 7
Green Bay, WI: 6.5
Columbus, OH: 6.5
Shreveport, LA: 5.0
Its a work in progress. Unfortunately, my sample population is underwhelming because my American travel has been mostly limited to Southern hick towns.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
