Desperately Needed: Solar Input
Eleven days without sunshine, and we Napkins are getting antsy. Me, anyway. I'd have to do some research to know for sure, but it sure seems like it didn't used to be this way in the winter: a month or two of sunny weather followed by six weeks of rain, then sunshine again and before you know it, we're well into spring. In the Bay Area of my youth, was there not a lovely mix -- two days of rain followed by four days of sunshine, interrupted by a day of rain, then five more days of sun, then maybe a week of rain and onward thusly? Ah, who the hell knows. In recent years the weather is an all-or-nothing proposition. And the forecast for the next week or so: bleak.
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
PR in Action
Kudos to the PR Department at Wal-mart, which is probably called the "Corporate Communications Department," as such operations are at most larger companies because PR folks can't help but PR even their own identity.
Wal-mart had a bad November, with sales rising only 0.7 percent over the previous year, and its gain in December of 3 percent was solidly below the gain it posted last year, 4.3 percent. Yet there's the New York Times saying that "Wal-Mart, the country's biggest retailer, managed to come back with style."
Well, the PR people certainly did.
Faced with bad-to-mediocre news, Wal-mart spun a story of a near-miraculous comeback from the depths of retailer hell. The story begins with the Times recounting how a top company executive tracked on his Blackberry the unfolding bad news that hit on the day after Thanksgiving. "'At 7 a.m., I looked at the readings coming in from other states, and my gut feeling was confirmed,' he recalled in an interview yesterday. 'By 8 a.m., we knew we had an issue.'"
That's when fearless Wal-mart executives -- and even hourly employees, the Times notes -- sprung into action. They held meetings and developed ad campaigns and stuff, but mostly what they did was cut prices on key items. Sometimes it worked -- the rise in fleece sales was said to be "very significant" (note the use of imprecise but suggestively positive language). Sometimes it didn't. Sometimes we're not really sure. But surely they attacked the problem.
Was all this cost-cutting a little, uhm, dangerous? Wal-mart says, uhm, not really we're pretty sure maybe not we don't think so at this point. Here's how the Times put it:
"Still those markdowns did not cut significantly into profits, executives said. Tom Schoewe, Wal-Mart's chief financial officer, said that earnings should come in within the range projected earlier: between 73 and 75 cents a share for the quarter that ends in January. 'We haven't revised that estimate,' he said."
Again, note the suggestive but imprecise language. "Did not cut significantly into profits"; "should come in within the range projected"; "'we haven't revised that estimate.'"
What becomes clear in reading this story is that the Times desperately likes this tale of Wal-mart, the behemoth, acting nimbly to save the Christmas season. What also becomes clear is that it's not entirely clear that 1) what Wal-mart did was at all unusual (don't companies always track sales and lower prices to move items that are glued to shelves?); or 2) that what Wal-mart did was especially effective.
The Times says that "tomorrow, Wal-mart is expected to announce that December sales achieved a 3 percent gain over sales for December 2003." The Times doesn't say who expects this or where it got its information about these expectations; I'm going out on a limb and guessing Wal-mart. No matter. The Times likes this number because it's bigger than the 2 percent rise number that Wal-mart had put out last week. Success -- for the PR department.
Instead of just dumping a load of disappointing news out to the business world -- the 3 percent rise in December sales -- Wal-mart's PR folks deftly juxtaposed it against the 2 percent figure it "estimated" last week (and which, the cynic in me presumes, was a number Wal-mart was pretty sure it would actually beat), then fed the Times a lot of nice anecdotes and half-baked insider information to show how this victory was achieved. They recognized that how desperately media want to tell dramatic stories, and how bringing reporters inside your company -- giving them information they typically don't have access to -- can be so effective.
Beautifully done.
Kudos to the PR Department at Wal-mart, which is probably called the "Corporate Communications Department," as such operations are at most larger companies because PR folks can't help but PR even their own identity.
Wal-mart had a bad November, with sales rising only 0.7 percent over the previous year, and its gain in December of 3 percent was solidly below the gain it posted last year, 4.3 percent. Yet there's the New York Times saying that "Wal-Mart, the country's biggest retailer, managed to come back with style."
Well, the PR people certainly did.
Faced with bad-to-mediocre news, Wal-mart spun a story of a near-miraculous comeback from the depths of retailer hell. The story begins with the Times recounting how a top company executive tracked on his Blackberry the unfolding bad news that hit on the day after Thanksgiving. "'At 7 a.m., I looked at the readings coming in from other states, and my gut feeling was confirmed,' he recalled in an interview yesterday. 'By 8 a.m., we knew we had an issue.'"
That's when fearless Wal-mart executives -- and even hourly employees, the Times notes -- sprung into action. They held meetings and developed ad campaigns and stuff, but mostly what they did was cut prices on key items. Sometimes it worked -- the rise in fleece sales was said to be "very significant" (note the use of imprecise but suggestively positive language). Sometimes it didn't. Sometimes we're not really sure. But surely they attacked the problem.
Was all this cost-cutting a little, uhm, dangerous? Wal-mart says, uhm, not really we're pretty sure maybe not we don't think so at this point. Here's how the Times put it:
"Still those markdowns did not cut significantly into profits, executives said. Tom Schoewe, Wal-Mart's chief financial officer, said that earnings should come in within the range projected earlier: between 73 and 75 cents a share for the quarter that ends in January. 'We haven't revised that estimate,' he said."
Again, note the suggestive but imprecise language. "Did not cut significantly into profits"; "should come in within the range projected"; "'we haven't revised that estimate.'"
What becomes clear in reading this story is that the Times desperately likes this tale of Wal-mart, the behemoth, acting nimbly to save the Christmas season. What also becomes clear is that it's not entirely clear that 1) what Wal-mart did was at all unusual (don't companies always track sales and lower prices to move items that are glued to shelves?); or 2) that what Wal-mart did was especially effective.
The Times says that "tomorrow, Wal-mart is expected to announce that December sales achieved a 3 percent gain over sales for December 2003." The Times doesn't say who expects this or where it got its information about these expectations; I'm going out on a limb and guessing Wal-mart. No matter. The Times likes this number because it's bigger than the 2 percent rise number that Wal-mart had put out last week. Success -- for the PR department.
Instead of just dumping a load of disappointing news out to the business world -- the 3 percent rise in December sales -- Wal-mart's PR folks deftly juxtaposed it against the 2 percent figure it "estimated" last week (and which, the cynic in me presumes, was a number Wal-mart was pretty sure it would actually beat), then fed the Times a lot of nice anecdotes and half-baked insider information to show how this victory was achieved. They recognized that how desperately media want to tell dramatic stories, and how bringing reporters inside your company -- giving them information they typically don't have access to -- can be so effective.
Beautifully done.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Training Log: Jan 04 05
Arrived at the gym this afternoon to find the pool closed for repairs. Reportedly the membership had been warned of this eventuality with numerous signs plastered throughout the building; I saw none of them, and none were up today, the first day of the closure. Anyway, this state of affairs will be in place until Sunday, which is just too damn long not to swim, so I'll probably fork over 10 bucks to swim at my old gym on Thursday. (I left the old gym because the pool is indoors and the toxic air was causing me massive sinus problems, all of which cleared up once I headed across town to my current gym, where I can swim in fresh air -- well, fresh as can be since they finished the 29/Trancas interchange a few hundred yards away, which, when the wind blows just right, seems to leave an invisible cloud of auto toxins right over the pool.
No swim, so I ran. Good run. I'll run Thursday, probably 10 miles, then Saturday morning I'll crank a 15-miler at 8min/mile pace. I'm thinking of doing a 20-miler on January 29, then probably one more long run around February 12. Napa Valley Marathon is March 6.
Run: 7 miles / 52:30 / 7:30 per mile, nice and easy, quick recovery.
Arrived at the gym this afternoon to find the pool closed for repairs. Reportedly the membership had been warned of this eventuality with numerous signs plastered throughout the building; I saw none of them, and none were up today, the first day of the closure. Anyway, this state of affairs will be in place until Sunday, which is just too damn long not to swim, so I'll probably fork over 10 bucks to swim at my old gym on Thursday. (I left the old gym because the pool is indoors and the toxic air was causing me massive sinus problems, all of which cleared up once I headed across town to my current gym, where I can swim in fresh air -- well, fresh as can be since they finished the 29/Trancas interchange a few hundred yards away, which, when the wind blows just right, seems to leave an invisible cloud of auto toxins right over the pool.
No swim, so I ran. Good run. I'll run Thursday, probably 10 miles, then Saturday morning I'll crank a 15-miler at 8min/mile pace. I'm thinking of doing a 20-miler on January 29, then probably one more long run around February 12. Napa Valley Marathon is March 6.
Run: 7 miles / 52:30 / 7:30 per mile, nice and easy, quick recovery.
Monday, January 03, 2005
Training Log: Jan 03 05
It's not always pleasant, working out. Injuries happen. You bonk on a long ride. A mistimed breath in the pool leads to, uh, complications. It could be a lot of things. Tonight, for instance (like I said, it's not always pleasant), I set out on a short, easy run only to find myself beset by lower GI issues.
That's right, I had to go. I hardly thought about it at all for the first mile. During Mile 2, I began to wonder. Mile 3 suggested the urges might become very powerful indeed. Mile 4 was a bit of a trial, requiring some deft but not desperate mind games. Mile 5 -- the ultimate mile -- was a highly, highly suspenseful.
I made it.
Today's training:
Swim: 1600 yards nonstop / 55 seconds per 50 yards, nice and steady. What's really becoming evident on my swim is that I gain efficientcy as I go deeper into a long swim. I think it's all about getting a feel for the water. Anyway, short but good swim.
Run: 5 miles at what was supposed to be an easy pace, but ended being merely slow. Around 8:20/mile.
It's not always pleasant, working out. Injuries happen. You bonk on a long ride. A mistimed breath in the pool leads to, uh, complications. It could be a lot of things. Tonight, for instance (like I said, it's not always pleasant), I set out on a short, easy run only to find myself beset by lower GI issues.
That's right, I had to go. I hardly thought about it at all for the first mile. During Mile 2, I began to wonder. Mile 3 suggested the urges might become very powerful indeed. Mile 4 was a bit of a trial, requiring some deft but not desperate mind games. Mile 5 -- the ultimate mile -- was a highly, highly suspenseful.
I made it.
Today's training:
Swim: 1600 yards nonstop / 55 seconds per 50 yards, nice and steady. What's really becoming evident on my swim is that I gain efficientcy as I go deeper into a long swim. I think it's all about getting a feel for the water. Anyway, short but good swim.
Run: 5 miles at what was supposed to be an easy pace, but ended being merely slow. Around 8:20/mile.
Saturday, January 01, 2005
Training Log: Jan 01 05
Three years of consistent (though not hard-core) triathlon training, and I've never kept a log. Highly regretable. There have been countless instances when I wanted to look back and see where I was at a point in the season. OK, so I can't go back and recreate the past three years. But I can track the coming years as they unfold. Starting now.
Run: 10.06 miles / 1:13:50 / 7:20 pace / Felt great; moderate pace with hard but not killer finish.
Three years of consistent (though not hard-core) triathlon training, and I've never kept a log. Highly regretable. There have been countless instances when I wanted to look back and see where I was at a point in the season. OK, so I can't go back and recreate the past three years. But I can track the coming years as they unfold. Starting now.
Run: 10.06 miles / 1:13:50 / 7:20 pace / Felt great; moderate pace with hard but not killer finish.
Trend Alert: Male Eyebrow-Waxing
The New York Times says manly men are getting their eyebrows prettified. Be honest, now: Is this something I need to look into?
Thursday, December 30, 2004
Sack of Wood
I told Niko that I had blogged about him reading the book (see previous post). He said, "I didn't know you had a blog." I told him I did. So then, a few minutes later, Niko brought me a sack of wood scraps and said, "Blog this!" OK. Here it is. Sack of wood. Plus, there's a little plastic mouse in the sack, which is actually Niko's newest winter cap -- a Spongebob cap.
Luckiest Man on Earth
It's early in the morning, dawn just breaking. Niko is moving back and forth between the dining room table, where milk and toast sit, and the living room, where a whole world of activities are possible. I tell him I'm going to check my email and I move to the office nook on the other side of the kitchen. As I peck at the keyboard, I hear faint sounds from accross the house. Niko talking to himself? After a minute or two, I notice the talking continuing. I sneak through the kitchen and peer through the dining room into the living room. Christmas lights are twinkling all around. And there, in front of the fireplace, sits Niko, reading a book. Saying all the words out loud. Pausing to ponder the plot. Turning pages. Occasionally inflecting his voice to try to match the characters and their actions. What could be better than your five-year-old, on his own, sitting down to read a book? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
It's early in the morning, dawn just breaking. Niko is moving back and forth between the dining room table, where milk and toast sit, and the living room, where a whole world of activities are possible. I tell him I'm going to check my email and I move to the office nook on the other side of the kitchen. As I peck at the keyboard, I hear faint sounds from accross the house. Niko talking to himself? After a minute or two, I notice the talking continuing. I sneak through the kitchen and peer through the dining room into the living room. Christmas lights are twinkling all around. And there, in front of the fireplace, sits Niko, reading a book. Saying all the words out loud. Pausing to ponder the plot. Turning pages. Occasionally inflecting his voice to try to match the characters and their actions. What could be better than your five-year-old, on his own, sitting down to read a book? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Sunday, December 26, 2004
Will They Never Learn?
Not a big deal, and certainly nothing new. But must East Coast media always be so clueless about something so basic as West Coast geography? One expects them to misunderstand the culture, and of course they almost always do. The lay of the land, however, is easily attainable, maps being widely available in bookstores, libraries, the Internet -- one imagines even at the copy desk at The New York Times. Alas, the latest offense is one I've seen repeated dozens of times in recent months: The placing of "Sideways," Alexander Payne's brilliant little film about life, love and wine, in Northern California.
No.
The film is set in Santa Barbara County's wine country. Not Napa's. Not Sonoma's. Not Mendocino's. Not even the Santa Cruz Mountains' or San Clara Valley's (there really once was a wine country there). Miles and Jack and the gang cavort a mere couple of hours up the 101 from Hollywood, ferchrisakes. Yet here's Stephen Holden writing (and, worse, nobody on the desk catching): "'Sideways': The story of two buddies on a wine-tasting excursion in northern California ... "
No. No!
Well, the good news is that Holden has "Sideways" on his Top Ten list for the year. But still.
Not a big deal, and certainly nothing new. But must East Coast media always be so clueless about something so basic as West Coast geography? One expects them to misunderstand the culture, and of course they almost always do. The lay of the land, however, is easily attainable, maps being widely available in bookstores, libraries, the Internet -- one imagines even at the copy desk at The New York Times. Alas, the latest offense is one I've seen repeated dozens of times in recent months: The placing of "Sideways," Alexander Payne's brilliant little film about life, love and wine, in Northern California.
No.
The film is set in Santa Barbara County's wine country. Not Napa's. Not Sonoma's. Not Mendocino's. Not even the Santa Cruz Mountains' or San Clara Valley's (there really once was a wine country there). Miles and Jack and the gang cavort a mere couple of hours up the 101 from Hollywood, ferchrisakes. Yet here's Stephen Holden writing (and, worse, nobody on the desk catching): "'Sideways': The story of two buddies on a wine-tasting excursion in northern California ... "
No. No!
Well, the good news is that Holden has "Sideways" on his Top Ten list for the year. But still.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
