Yes, that is my iPod after it jumped from the dash of my car into moving traffic. We had great times together, since the beginning when my iPod taught me about my horrible taste in music. It was preceeded and is survived by brother Powerbook(the older cousin of MacBook Pro) who joined the team in June 2005 and shortly developed into a minor obsession.
In recent history, there have been two governments that opened the government purse strings in an effort to bolster fading public support - the last federal and the last provincial government. While listening to 680 news today, I began to see evidence of a third such case that is even more politically Machiavellian. Last week, Dalton McGuinty acknowledged that his government had pushed $32 million out the door without any application process or accountability. In the communications play book, the next logical step is to "change the channel" with different news. Political spinners can always rely on the public's short memory (see "Health Tax").
1) Channel surfing last night, I came across this new show - a new low in television where the entire premise is breaking up couples. Like a nastier temptation island. And is is on MTV! Wow.
2) Take a look at Apple's Q3 results yesterday (Top-line points at MacRumors and AppleInsider). It must have been hard to keep a straight face as they announced that profit almost doubled and margins are near 40 per cent. A few observations: Profit is nearing a dollar a share and they are sitting on $13.8 BILLION in cash. To me that is a hard amount to spend strictly on R+D, so it would seem logical that Apple should either be looking for a strategic acquisition or to start spinning that cash out to shareholders. Second, in the iPhone hype there was a serious question as to whether the new product would hurt or help sales of Mac computers and iPods. Yesterday's results clearly illustrate that it didn't hurt. The halo effect of a new product launch, done properly, can propel an entire brand. (See Audi's upcoming R8 supercar, sold out since they built the Model T Ford.) Update:AAPL up $9 (7%) today.
3) One of my pet-peeves is when high budget marketing campaigns skimp on the crucial details, often because they were not properly explained or considered. I visited simpsonizeme earlier today, a site to promote the Simpsons Movie and Burger King and was greeted with news that the site had too much traffic. Could I please come back later. In that type of word-of-mouth marketing, you only get one chance. Don't lose it because you didn't have enough bandwidth.
4) In Bracebridge political news, MP Tony Clement has a clever (and well principled) campaign on now to save Muskoka's northern status. Smart and right, a good combo.
5) I'm going to try this new software that Janke recommends.
My addictive personality has found a new home with Entourage. In the past few months, I've caught up on four seasons of this great show. Well written, hilarious, but not looking for the cheap gag. The show benifits from strong writing and great charactors. One of the most interesting things that I have found is how the "star" Vinny Chase is actually one of the least interesting people on the show, easily over-shadowed by Ari, E and the ongoing Turtle-Drama banter. Even Ari's assistant Lloyd gets more laughs (especially when he runs out of the office due to a recent break-up with Ari in chase and yelling "LLLLLLLLllllllloooooyyyyydddd!!!!!")
This reminds me of the West Wing's orignal writer Aaron Sorkin saying that the show was originally intended to be about Sam Seabourne (Rob Lowe), but quickly evolved into a show about all of the staff and the President ("Entourage") and the White House overall.
HBO is also very cleverly marketing the show. Expert web surfer Daily Dyson found this promo site and trailer for the movie Meddelin which is Vince's most recent hit in the movie. Coincidentaly, in a recent episode the trailer is leaked online and can be found on YouTube.
Regardless of your political stance, you have to admit that this is one powerful answer. Very JFK, spine-tingling. Now if Edwards could only get more people to see that passion and eloquence...
As a side note, I only saw the trail end of last night's debate, but it certainly seemed that real questions via YouTube took some of the formality out of a traditionally staid and boring debate. It also gave every candidate the chance to show they are YouTube savvy, and this clip along with this page put Edwards in that race.
David Miller, in response to council deciding to delay his proposed massive tax hikes, has apparently decided to throw a hissy fit and propose absurd consequences including massive TTC cuts, a new casino and raising your property taxes to ensure nobody ever wants to live in Toronto. I have two questions:
1) How did it get so desperate? If these massive actions are necessary, wouldn't a responsible person have been phasing them in over the past 5 years? Or at least included them in their election platform?
2) What about the less headline catching solutions, such as looking at council's expense habits and the size of the city government? What has been the cost of the fun street lights that countdown your wait?(A favorite of Bay Street Type A folks)
I vote for a responsible audit of city spending and potential savings from an outside auditor that the public can review and then judge. Similar to a publicly held company. Wouldn't that be an odd practice in accountability?
With the next Ontario election rapidly approaching, there are a number of issues facing each of us, however there is no single, over-arching issue. As such, my prediction is that we will be faced with a choice of leadership - who would we rather behind the wheel of Ontario's engine? The stakes are high: growth, jobs, taxes (Hi, Mr.Mayor) and our place in the federation.
This morning, I sent the following letter to my city council representative. What do you think about Toronto's proposed new taxes?
Mr. Jenkins,
As you know, today City Council will vote on two new taxes. I understand it is your intention to vote against these tax increases, and for that I would like to thank you.
The proposed taxes are bad policy for Toronto for a number of reasons:
Both taxes piggy back existing provincial taxes and take advantage of "one-time" occurrences like renewing a driver's licence and buying or selling a home. This is as opposed to a regularly paid tax, such as property tax. It is clear to me that these taxes are designed to blur the line of responsibility between the provincial and municipal government so voters are unclear who should be held responsible. In addition to the bad precedent of ambiguous lines of responsibility, the taxes were not a part of the Mayor's election platform or mandate. Toronto deserves an accountable city hall and voting against these taxes is a vote for accountability.
As a city, Toronto also faces a challenge with residents and businesses moving to surrounding suburbs, thus decreasing our tax base and weakening Toronto's economic engine. I would not be surprised if the net outcome of the land transfer tax is a smaller total tax base as residents move to other municipalities in order to save thousands of dollars on a home purchase. Buyers and sellers budget based on the total cost/revenue of a sale or purchase. This new land transfer tax will mean sellers paying more and buyers receiving less in Toronto than in areas like Mississauga, Whitby, Oshawa and even Kitchener-Waterloo.
In addition, I am not yet convinced that the city has yet made the effort to find savings within the existing expenditures. Before raising the cost of living in Toronto, city council and management must look for ways to more efficiently spend the current revenues. A competitive business would not raise prices until all other avenues were exhausted. Similarly, Toronto should view itself as a competitive business for residents and businesses in Ontario.
Given the reasons above, I hope that you and your colleagues will take the opportunity today to turn down these tax increases and keep Toronto accountable, strong and competitive.
