The a-hole approved car

The other night I was out to dinner with a friend and we got on the topic of cars. Not really cars, but bad drivers. Or rather, a$$hole drivers. The stories were entertaining but what really made it memorable was that all our stories seemed to start the same way:

"I was driving down the road and some a$$hole in a 3-series BMW…"

Think about your own encounters with an a$$hole driver, and I'll wager at least half of them involve a 3-series bimmer. It is the a$$holes choice of car.

I'm not saying that everyone who drives a 3-series is an a$$hole. Off the top of my head, I can think of at least three friends who drive a 3-series, and they are very nice people and courteous drivers. But there is a segment of the population out there who drives likes a$$holes, and the care they seem to drive most is the 3-series.

The only reason I can think of why has to do with the status. BMW makes fantastic cars. They are (usually) styled very well and their performance is impressive. Driving one denotes a certain status or success. The average BMW costs more than the average household income in the US. I don't think a$$hole behavior is as prevalent with 5-series, 7-series, etc, drivers. I only see it with the 300's. It is the lowest price model, making it more accessible to a larger portion of the jerk population.

3-series owners drive like NBA players showboat: They act like childish jerks and they want everyone to notice; they want street cred. Whenever I see one on the road today, I instinctively think "a$$hole alert!", and take defensive steps immediately. They have a bad reputation, which provokes an instantiations dislike for them, and an unwillingness of other drivers to show them any kindness on the road. As a result, this causes more a$$hole behavior from them, which continues the spiral.

Meanwhile, other jerky drivers slip by under the radar, their numbers in other models of cars are too small to notice. The really clever ones drive cars you would never suspect an a$$hole driver to own. They perform unbelievable acts of a$$holeness on an unsuspecting motorists. They get away with it because no one expects this behavior, except from a 3-series driver.

Which is why I drive a Volvo.

Happy driving.

Forecast for snow and stupidity

On Baseball's opening day in 2008, I bitched about how stupid it was for the city to build a new stadium for the Minnesota Twins without a retractable dome. It was snowing that day. Lots. 6-8" of snow. This is not unexpected on opening day, in this part of the country.

Season Opener for Stupidity

We were told not to worry; the real problem with snow and bad weather was at the beginning at the season, not the end. As anyone who watched the national weather reports today, or who has a friend in Minnesota knows, it is snowing here. Again. It is early in the season for us to have snow, but it is not completely unexpected. Had this been 2010, and if the Twins had a closer, we would be facing a possible snow-out in upcoming playoff games.

There is really nothing new to bitch about now. The stadium is scheduled to open next Spring, and if we keep our existing team, there is a distinct possibility we will have to deal with snow in a playoff game next year. And unlike snow-outs at the beginning of the season, when you have to make up games at the end of the season, the longer it takes to play, the colder and more unpleasant it gets.

When the Milwaukee Brewers needed a new stadium, they also hit up the State; five counties had to increase their sales tax by 0.1% to pay for the $400 million in construction costs. The stadium was finished in 2001. It has a retractable dome. The stadium for the Twins costs more; its projected cost is $522 million ($390 for the stadium, the rest on infrastructure improvements), also paid for by a sales tax increase. It costs more and it does not have a retractable dome.

I never would have thought folks in Wisconsin were smarter than us (or that we were stupider than them), but apparently I was wrong. Very wrong. They got a stadium that costs 20% less, plus a roof for free. Plus it holds more people.

My apologies to everyone in the Badger State for any disparaging comments I have every made to you, or your state.

Signs of Mystery

So I stopped by the US Bank branch in NE Minnie today, and I saw this sign in the parking lot. At first I didn't pay too much attention to it, but then it hit me - something is very, very odd about this sign.

It was Saturday afternoon, not during banking hours, and I was using the ATM. My total trip would be (I hoped) under 5 minutes. So in terms of the requirements of the sign, I was obeying the man.

What struck me as odd is who is supposed to use this spots during all other times?

The sign specified ATM use during non-banking hours. What about during banking hours? What about for customers who actually have business in the bank - they are not allowed to park here? This and the ones next to it are prime spots - equivalent to the handicapped spots. What about people who park here to use the ATM during banking hours? Are they in violation of the sign? It sure seems so.

I have no grand conclusions to pull from this episode, aside that it supports my grand unification theory of humanity: the idiots are taking over and we are all doomed.

As for my visit to the ATM, the machine was out of money. I don't know if that makes me in violation of the sign as I did not actually get to use the ATM. Eh, it is good to be a rebel now and then.

Happy banking

The Laziness Quotient

There is a coke machine very close to where I sit at work. It is on the main hallway of the first floor. It charges $1.35 for a 20 oz bottle of Coke. On the second floor, the vending machines charge $1.25, 10 cents less, for the same bottle.

Both vending machines are run by the same company, but there is a difference in price. Someone has figured out my laziness quotient.

I discovered this price disparity by accident. I wanted a Dr. Pepper, which was only available on the second floor vending machines. It was there I noticed this price difference. Why, I asked myself, why would the same company charge two different prices for exactly the same item?

There was only one reason - because they knew I was lazy.

They knew they could extract an extra dime out of me because I was too lazy to walk upstairs and save an extra 10 cents. And they are right. When I need a Coke fix, I rarely make the trip to the second floor.

I give them credit for their ingenuity. They have figured out how much my time and effort are worth and they have extracted a price premium because of it. So what is my laziness quotient? At what point will I be willing to put out the effort to save money? I tried to find out:

There are three factors at work here: money, time and effort.

Money: How much is the difference between the two options - the lazy one and the discounted item? In this case 10 cents.

Time: How much longer does it take me to get the coke from upstairs? It takes me 13 seconds to get from my desk to the 1st floor Coke machine (assuming there is no traffic). To get to the second floor machine, it takes 1:37 seconds (again, assuming no traffic). Transaction time is a wash, so the difference is: 97-13=84 x 2 (return trip) = 168 seconds, or 2:48.

Effort: The big difference in effort is really the stairs. There are 23 steps I have to walk up to get to the next floor (I know- it doesn't seem right. The first set of stairs has 12 steps to the mid-point landing, but the second set has only 11. I find this very odd at a company full of engineers, but I double checked: 23 steps.) So with the return trip, there are 46 stairs to be navigated.

So by my thinking, the laziness formula would be in the structure of the following:

(x*168) + (y*46) = (z*0.1)

Where x, y and z are the coefficients which need to be solved.

I'll be looking for other settings to gather data to solve this one. I think sporting events would be a good venue. In the meantime, I will try to figure out why on earth soda bottles are so large nowadays (remember when 16oz containers were considered large?) and what is the theoretical limit of the amount of coke one person should drink at a sitting.

Happy Laziness!

Revenge of the interviewed!

Thursday I had another internal interview. I was surprised to get an email about this job. Actually, I was surprised the email I got about the job was an invitation to discuss it. I thought the note I received would have been a rejection. I'll explain why:

First, it was for a job that was listed several job grades above my level; the fellow who had the job was an internal legend who was just promoted to Director (which at my employer is equivalent to being elected Pope). Second, it was in the Automotive division, one which I have never worked nor had any contact. Granted I do drive a car, but that doesn't qualify as industry experience. Lastly, it was managing the adhesives portfolio, which I have not marketed. Those of you who know me know of my fondness for tape (such a fun toy!), and during the slow hours of trade shows, I have used the adhesive guns to create complex structures of wood and ear plugs. But that is really more of arts and crafts activity and not really marketing (close, but not quite).

So why was I selected to discuss this position? I have no idea. I didn't think my chances were good to get this job, so I spent absolutely zero time preparing. I was chosen for a reason, or as a mistake; either way I could not reasonably address these gaps in the 36 hours between being notified and the interview. Instead, my "prep" involved having a coke and a pack of twix bars.

Adding to my handicap, I forgot an umbrella, so both me and my suit got thoroughly wet. Even after toweling off, I smelled like dog. So with all this going against me, I went in to meet the Director. She was very nice and pleasant, but direct and a bit hurried; she was leaving for three weeks in Asia the next day. She asked me before we get started, do I have any questions?

I couldn't resist.

"Yes, one. Why are you interviewing me?"

I don't know why I said it. I do have a tendency to state the obvious, or ask the simple questions that we should know the answer to, but that we often don't. Or, maybe it was just the frustration of the job search; I had lost out on a job the previous week, which I thought I would have been an obvious choice. Whatever my reason was, I put the questions down as a strike back for all of us who are looking for jobs and have had to put up with this mindless, painful process.

Needless to say, that was not the question she was expecting. She was a bit surprised, until I pointed out the reasons I was not a fit. Then something remarkable happened. She then looked at the notes she had made on my resume and says, "yes, now I remember. I thought you would be a good fit because..." and she then proceed to tell me why I was right for a position for which I am clearly under qualified (not to mention that I smell like wet dog).

I have been told that the secret to interviewing is to get the interviewer to like you, that way they will be more forgiving of the parts of your background that do not fit. I think I did the next best thing; I got her to tell me why I was the right fit for the job.

The rest of the interview went well. We talked about the challenges of the auto industry; I was fairly up yo date on what was going on thanks to "The Economist" (turns out we are both junkies of that publication).

I have no idea how it will go or if I will get this job. I have had better interviews, but none where I felt so relaxed. I'll see how that goes - if nothing else, it was worth a shot.