Posts from January 2007

I really haven't been paying much attention to Howard Stern's success at Sirius, but at the moment it is all over the news that Stern got an $83m bonus through stock compensation -

Firstly, I didn't know that his contract was for 5 years for a total amount of compensation of $500m. 500 MILLION! To my knowledge this amount is separate from the $83m bonus payment.

Apparently, according to the article, the number of Sirius subscribers totalled 600,000 when Stern signed. They also agreed to a bonus if the number of subscribers at the end of 2006 eclipsed analyst expectations by 2 million - in the end, Sirius subscribers have increased ten fold over the course of the past two years. This is an unbelievably phenomenal growth rate over ten years or longer let alone two.

This is what I call results-based compensation. Its fairly obvious that Stern has affected Sirius in a major way - not so obvious for Goldman Sachs' CEO, who just got a $52m bonus.

Still though - Howard Stern is becoming one of the richest entertainers in the world in a relatively quiet manner - people make a lot less of a fuss over his compensation than corporate officers.

Day off - lovely! I've been drinking way more tea lately... I am enjoying it!

@paul - your thing about the braces - I have always believed that doctors are guilty of trying to drum up business for each other. The first question I would have asked is, "If this isn't medically necessary, explain to me why I should be interested in this let alone pay $4200 out of my own pocket for it?"

I was checking out a message board today and there was a discussion about the upcoming minimum wage increase and how it is going to affect American manufacturers. You all (well, most of you) have an idea of what I do and as a result its hard for me, or really pointless in the end, to break out with the "full disclosure" and let people know that because of what our company does I have a direct and privileged access to information about this particular subject. Its one thing to be a message board warrior and try to provide web page links to make a point - its completely another thing to see it on a daily basis in person and have your knowledge come from that kind of direct experience.

My viewpoint on the minimum wage increase is that generally I don't see why we shouldn't. In truth, many states (including New York) have been raising the minimum wage despite what is going on at the federal level.

Advocates of the minimum wage increase claim that a meaningful segment of society will benefit positively as a result of the increase but are being dishonest about exactly WHO will be the biggest beneficiaries. Anybody that has read a collective bargaining agreement know what I'm getting at.

The people who poopoo the idea claim that there will be job losses and price increases. Who is right?

They are both right to an extent, but the truth about all of this is that we are talking about a relatively insignificant number of the American workforce. According to a study done by the Bureau of Labor Statistics - - 1.9 million Americans, or roughly 2.5% of the American workforce, makes at or below the Federal minimum. This includes servers and bartenders, who legally earn a sub-federal wage yet generally earn far more on average.

Creating law to satisfy a very small minority is generally bad law, but on the other hand, what will the argument be in another 10 years if the feds didn't raise the wage - that after another 10 years its still an insignificant number and therefore we still shouldn't bother raising the minimum?

Numerous states defer to the federal minimum, but just as many if not more legislate on their own a minimum wage that is $1.50 or higher than the federal minimum. Most of these states that defer to the federal amount are concentrated in rural areas, and most of the states that have a significantly higher minimum wage are concentrated in the populous states. The most interesting thing to me about the study is that two of the states with the highest minimum wages (California and Washington) by proportion actually have the lowest amount of minimum wage workers. So what does this mean - are we talking about a cosmetic or an effective law?

2.5% of American workers earn at or below the federal, but a whopping 12-14% will be affected by "spillover effects." They are talking about union workers, friends. I know this because I've read countless collective bargaining agreements and correlating wage increases when a minimum wage is increased is PART OF THE CONTRACT! We are talking about people who are earning double, triple, sometimes quadruple or more of the minimum wage, that have a contractual obligation agreed upon by their employer that will allow them to get an extra $2.10 an hour by 2008 if the feds raise the minimum.

So, who are the real beneficiaries of the minimum wage increase? Decide for yourself but knowing what I know and having seen what I seen, and especially after reading federal studies on this subject, I am convinced that the biggest beneficiaries to such an increase will be those who truly do not 'need' the money. Politicians are selling this as an initiative that will help "the little guy" but when only less than 500,000 American workers earn the minimum and the other 1.4 million in the study are service workers that in truth earn significantly more than minimum because of tips.

Opponents of the increase suggest that layoffs will occur and prices will increase, this affecting the entire middle class... and as a result the standard of living will decrease. In my view they aren't entirely incorrect, but are we talking about a massive decrease in our standard of living? Hell no. Layoffs will occur, but not like you would think. Lets take a company that is unionized and has 50,000 hourly employees as an example. With a $2.10 increase per hour, that is $105,000 per hour that the company will pay after a contractually mandated increase. Not including any overtime, this is $4.2m per week and $218.4m per year in wages! I'll give you one guess who is going to end up paying for that extra 9-figure wage bill.

Generally, a minimum wage increase will end up affecting relatively few people and isn't going to cause the benefit or the downfall that people on both sides of the argument have suggested.

Here is my take on it - we should do this because the states are already ahead of the federal government in this regard... the fact that the feds are behind the states is a bit ridiculous. We should do this not because of how many people may or may not be affected, but because its simply the right thing to do. So what if only 2.5% will be affected - for that matter, who cares if 14% will be affected? Just remember that this debate is largely driven by special interests so do not let it cloud your judgment. The federal minimum should be increased, as far as I'm concerned, because there are some in our country, even if it is only a relative few, that can benefit from it. The unions be damned - their part in this can be summarized in how wages and benefits are affecting companies like Ford... they are actually costing their members jobs - my concern is for the 50-year old lady working at BK because no other jobs exist in her area. Aren't people like her the people we should be focusing on?

I loathe even suggesting reading something from Artvoice normally, but the newest issue has an amazing interview with Congressman Brian Higgins. Check it out.

And when I say 'amazing,' I'm talking about Brian Higgins. Geoff Kelly, the worm who interviewed him, proceeded to ask Mr. Higgins the most idiotic, biased, leading line of questioning I have ever read in local print. Geoff Kelly is a fucking disgraceful human being who obviously has a major bone to pick with Mr. Higgins because, well frankly, he isn't a liberal. The pathetic part of it all was that Kelly believes that by rewording what he really thinks that somehow the readers, or even Mr. Higgins himself, are going to not realize it. Its a shame and a complete disgrace, but what else am I to expect from the utter and absolute garbage that we have for media in our city? You hire garbage and you are going to end up reviewing, editing and printing garbage. Way to go once again, Artvoice. FUCK YOU. Brian Higgins isn't as loony as Louise Slaughter or Cindy Sheehan and somehow this is a problem for you mouth breathers?

Geoff Kelly is an absolute idiot. Ignore his demure, banal, biased and predictable line of questioning. What to pay attention to is how Mr. Higgins easily handled Kelly. What you will find after reading Mr. Higgins thoughts is that he is a very level headed, practical, intelligent and thoughtful man. I was truly impressed by Congressman Higgins and I am proud to say that we have an excellent representative. If all members of Congress were like Mr. Higgins we would have an amazing body of politicians representing us.

Matt - we will definitely review a gluten-free beer. I'm aware of a few different types - one was actually contract brewed right here in Buffalo!

After doing a little bit of research and asking around we'll find one to highlight. Soon there will be tears of joy as you sip a beer thats totally faking the gluten content! One I found is a beer that you may be familiar with - Ramapo Valley honey beer. Its actually kosher! I have to imagine that one way of 'masking'

A general rule to follow - if you aren't a celiac you shouldn't be drinking the celiac's special beer. That is denying someone one of the greatest joys unjustly - let the guy or gal have his damn beer in peace!

I'm pleased that people seem to have taken to my beer reviews! After thinking about it a little bit (and probably some of what I'm about to say is understood already) I realized that I should probably throw down a list of disclaimers:

1. Talking about how the beer tastes will only be part of the reviews - I intend on passing along a little bit of knowledge about the style of beer, how it may compare to something you are definitely familiar with and a bit of background. This way, as you try new things you can be familiar with the different styles of brew and have a frame of reference when you are trying two things that are similar, and vice versa. Most people understand that a porter is different than a lager, but its not exactly common knowledge HOW they are precisely different. Learning a little bit about what we're drinking is part of the fun as far as I'm concerned and it will make you look smart at a party.

2. I may suggest where to locate a product but by no means am I promoting one retailer over another. For the purposes of the review we'll be looking at different beers that may simply not be available anywhere but a specialty store and so my hands are tied. Luckily for us, we live in a city plagued by chronic alcoholism so a lot of hard to find stuff is within our grasp. Except for Hacker-Pshorr - what the hell is up with that, Premier Group and/or Wegman's and/or Consumers?

3. I want to try to approach the reviews from as neutral a perspective as possible, but we're human and we all have different tastes. You may end up not liking something I liked in a review, so keep that in mind before you go and purchase something. You likely already have a bit of an idea, whether you realize it or not, about the things that you like and your willingness to take a leap of faith based on something somebody wrote. I hate saying that since part of the spirit of me doing this is to encourage people to branch out and try something completely different, but I'm definitely not handing out refunds.

4. Maybe there is a killer find out there that you think I should try and review - by all means I am open to suggestions, so don't be afraid to offer something up. @chico asked so he shall receive!

5. I will never waste my money on buying Busch or PBR let alone drink them, so you'll never see commercial domestic beer (in the traditional sense) in my reviews.

6. Like I said, the goal is to have some fun, learn some stuff, try new and exciting beers (or old yet still kicking varieties) and hopefully at least one person over the course of time will try and like something I liked - there is always a degree of pleasure in introducing something to somebody and getting a positive reaction, isn't there? If you dislike something I liked, please comment and go through your points - it will benefit everybody.

@jason and I have a habit of picking up new and exciting beers to try a couple times a week. Last night it dawned on me - one of us should have a beer review to put in our journals! I wish I would have thought about this sooner so I will review two beers for you here in this journal - the first is an absolutely epic Trappist style monk-brewed beer from Belgium, and the other is a traditional English style pub ale from Leeds.

I hope that you guys enjoy the reviews - I want to encourage people who might be afraid of trying something new, or who might be afraid of plunking down $11 for a 4-pack without knowing what it is that they are getting. In the future @jason may place the reviews in his journal, depending on his desire to do so.

Review #1 - Trappistes Rochefort 10 (Belgium) - - 10/10

Check out how in the bag I am - I'm cockeyed and red faced! New rule - treat high ABV drinks with respect! Do not let this fact deter you from my review - I assure you that while I was tipsy this was only my second drink and my pallete was keen as ever!







11.3% abv, 330ml bottle, $5-$10 per bottle.

Simply put, this is one of the greatests beers I've ever had. This beer is produced by one of only six trappist breweries in the entire world - its an exceedingly rare beer and usually very expensive. Luckily for us, you can find it at Premier Gourmet.

What is a trappist brewed beer? My friend, allow me the pleasure of introducing you to the finest, rarest and priciest beers on earth. These certified Trappist beers are made at only six places, all located in Belgium (Rochefort, Orval, Chimay, Achel, Westvleteren, Westmalle). Depending on the abbey that we are talking about, some or all of the production is done by the monks - the employment of laymen to help with the brewing process is common among Trappist breweries.

Why are these beers so rare and exceedingly expensive? The principle behind it is that they only make enough to keep the monastery going and don't give a damn about market demand. As a result, only a few places import these beers. In the case of Westvleteren, they do not commercially sell the beer - there are only two places on earth where you can legally purchase the beer. One is the brewery itself in Belgium, and the other is the inn directly across the street from the brewery. The monks very much discourage the reselling of the product and adjust how much individuals can buy. Even when you buy the Westvletern 12 it costs $40 a case. If you found it 'illegally' it would cost over twice as much... Westy 12 is considered the world's greatest beer yet it is utterly unavailable to the world.

In the case of Rochefort, both monks and laymen are involved in the production of the beer. These are handmade brews, lovingly and meticulously cared for during the brewing process. They are unique, rare and unlike anything you've ever tried. The monasteries usually have long, proud brewing traditions dating back several hundred to even 1,000 years in the case of Orval! What is even more incredible is that at Rochefort, the monks do not drink their beer so they have no idea what it tastes like! Divine inspiration, indeed - this is a beer that is universally considered one of the top 2 or 3 beers on earth.

I first had this beer a year ago in Seattle. The beer must be poured in a goblet to appreciate the color, head and nose of the beer. The beer has a very dark amber brown color, slightly opaque and outwardly shiny quality to it - it is truly a beautiful thing. Even the slightest bit of light makes the brew shine like a diamond when you look at it - can you possibly get more attractive? Giving it a good sniff before drinking reveals exactly how boozy this one is - at 11.3% its not the heaviest drink out there but I advise to sip this one slightly chilled. Upon tasting it you'll notice the leather, plum, raisin, brown sugar, bubble gum, rum-soaked dark berries and an amazing array of spices that deliver a unique and fabulous flavor. Its the most complex combinations of flavor that I've ever tasted in a beer. Given the layers of flavor and the high alcohol content you might assume that this is a heavy beer - not so! Lesser brewers have to compensate for complicated flavor and high alcohol content; most of the time the result is a beer that feels like a brick at the bottom of your stomach. Rochefort 10 is velvety and deceives you concerning the alcohol content - this explains my red face in the picture. Don't drink too fast!

Rochefort 10 is bitter, slightly sweet, medium bodied, fruity and incredible. If you are going to enjoy this with food, I would recommend treating the combination as if you are trying to match a good red wine.

Review #2 - Tetley "Smoothflow" English Ale (England) - 7/10



3.8% abv, 14.9 oz. can, $6 per 4-pack at Consumer Beverage.

In the United States Tetley is a name primarily associated with tea - this is a beer brewed by Carlsberg in Leeds, Yorkshire. Our supermarkets regularly carry UK-based widget ales with tall cans - anybody that has spent time in a beer section has surely seen Boddington's on the shelf. Smoothflow (as we'll call it anyway - this beer is nearly identical to another beer with a similar name that is marketed in the UK) is very comparable to Boddington's and is probably closest in resemblance to that beer. Therefore, if you are a Boddy's fan then you will find a direct comparison with this brew.

In a pint glass this beer has a red/brown/gold color to it, and thanks to the widget the can will produce a magnificent, creamy head that will last to the bottom of the glass. The beer has a more profound flavor than Boddington's with a light nutty, caramel flavor. Imagine the creamy texture of Guinness and the lightness of an ale and you can get the picture. It is not a heavy beer despite the texture and is easily drinkable. The creamy ale style typically doesn't have a strong flavor - if you are used to flavorful beers this beer will seem like a light one. In fact, if you are a light beer drinker I'd encourage you to try this - its better than Amstel Light, is light as a feather after you drink it and is vastly more delicious. Without careful attention you could drink through six of these with ease, which is nice. Here is the kicker - Coors Light would get you drunk faster and since this is Buffalo we all know that this is an important consideration.

This is one of the standard pub ales that you would find in England. I read another review that referred to this beer as "filth" - this is out of order! Ease of drinking and the creamy yet light texture make this one an obvious choice for an "every day" type of drink, if it were available in mass market. If you want something better than domestic beer that won't hammer you and will leave you without that really heavy feeling in your belly then I would recommend giving this a shot. This beer is what it is though and isn't particularly adventurous despite the fact that this is an enjoyable beer to kick back with. Better than average. Whether or not its comparable to light beer nutritionally is something I'll look into later, but if you are a light beer drinker then I believe this would be a good fit for you.

I perpetrated the single most loser thing that anybody could do - I stayed home New Year's Eve.

My plan was to go to PMT and my friends private party at Goodbar, but on New Year's Eve it dawned on me that I didn't feel like celebrating at all, even on the biggest party day of the year. I made an egregious error here - the solution to my non-party, non-cheerful mood would have been to simply go anyway! I should have just grabbed a bottle or two of champagne, drank them down and rolled with it. Instead I stayed home. Believe me, I'm not proud about it but I'm not too afraid to acknowledge a mistake if I make it. Even if I didn't feel like it I should have forced myself out.

I'll never stay home again! @jason and I are overdue a visit to a PMT party and all I can really say is that @paul, e:matt and @terry are good lads that I generally enjoy chatting with who know how to have a good time.

On to politics. Before you stop here and say, "Oh god, here goes Joshy again" - don't be afraid of another diatribe. I've generally been disinterested in the political process for a while now - even before the election. My interest right now is focused on what the Democratic majority in Congress are about to do, and you should be too. This is where I come in.

In general I think the Democrats have been gifted a fantastic opportunity to maintain control of Congress and potentially win the presidency in 2008. On Thursday, Democrats will be simultaneously breaking a campaign promise and ushering in a series of new laws that I generally think are needed. The campaign promise Democrats are breaking is that they intended on including the minority on lawmaking on a more broader scale than what has been in place previously.

I have no disagreement at all with what they want to do in the first 100 hours (minimum wage increase, tightening ethics rules, more stem cell research, cutting interest rates on school loans, cut subsidies to the oil industry) but if you are going to inspire confidence in the votership that subsequently put you in power (a hint - the votership that swung the election were moderate/conservative Democrats) you should probably actually stick to what you say. Simply saying, as Pelosi's aides have suggested, that shutting Republicans out for the first 100 hours isn't breaking the campaign promise and they should be judged on the first six months to a year, is unacceptable. You cannot do what Democrats are about to do and retain credibility when they rode the moderate wave into power on the back of promises such as one where they promise more cooperation in government. Right now, Democrats cannot say that they are hanging on to one of their prominent campaign promises - that is absolute and cannot be tempered with a suggestion that the Democrats intend on opening things up.... eventually.

I think that these sets of things the Democrats want to do in the first 100 hours are long overdue - like I said I have absolutely no problem with what they are starting with. Just do not trumpet the Democratic intention of 'unprecendented bipartisanship' while you turn around and do the exact opposite as the FIRST thing that you do when power is handed over. One of the rules of politics is that when power is handed to the other party, ignore everything that the new guys in power say about bipartisanship. The temptation is too great to rule the roost with a strong hand and there are no politicians in the United States that are particularly exceptional... the public have every right to feel skeptical about the intentions of their politicians if they cannot manage to hold onto a campaign promise through the first few hours of gaining power.

Do I think that Democrats will maintain a spirit of cooperation? No. The reason is because cooperation is a two-way street. Today the new leader of the DCCC, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, was quoted in the Washington Post as saying, "My sense is that there's going to be a testing period to gauge to what extent the Republcans want to join us in a constructive effort or whether they intend to be disruptive. It's going to be a work in progress." The problem with this is that "cooperation" doesn't mean that if Republicans don't agree with what you are doing, then bipartisanship has failed. Pursuing bipartisanship has a connotation tagged to it that you are willing to be as flexible as your opponent. If this is not true then you are not being bipartisan and therefore you cannot criticize the opposition for not playing along. The signal that the new DCCC chairman has sent is disconcerting.

I'll be interested in seeing exactly how things unfold for Democrats over the course of the next year. The DNC is fractured ideologically and while Pelosi has a reputation for keeping everybody together its clearly going to be a struggle to keep everybody happy. If they achieve the bipartisanship that they are boasting about, then I think a great political achievement will have been made and the American public will be the big winner. Whether we have the politicians that are capable of such an achievement remains to be seen, but my hope is that at least for a little while we'll remember that we are all Americans and we are going to have to put the vitriol aside in order to tackle our problems effectively. To say I'm skeptical would be an understatement, but in the end I'm an optimist and right now all we really have is hope and nothing more.

When I have a day off I usually don't appreciate it as much as I should. Today, however, I have to say that I've truly enjoyed it. And it hasn't required the use of green, leafy, flammable, stinky plants!

I went to the Co-Op to get some beans. I totally love their selection - a nice variety of organic and 'regular' beans. My two favorites are the Organic Sumatran and the one I got today - some sort of Nicaraguan variety that I couldn't pronounce despite my decent but still feeble command of Spanish. I'm not even sure that it was a Spanish word. In any case, when you go to the Co-Op its situated on the far right plu #17520. Sad... I can remember the PLU but not the name. Anyway I like the dark roasts best but this one was a medium dark and it said on the container "one of the best coffees" - I'll be the judge of that, thanks! A little over half a pound later ($5.89, small sacrifice considering what it costs to go to Spot multiple times a day every day) I was out the door. A note - their beans are actually roasted by Spot according to the fellas at Spot.

I also got some whole wheat roman rigatoni, mushroom red sauce and some Sierra Mist. I took my blood pressure when I was home - 189 over 102!!! I couldn't believe it so I checked it again - 179 over 101. I seriously, seriously need to get back on the diaretic I took to regulate my blood pressure. On top of that, I want to commit to taking my health more seriously and being in better shape. Part of this, of course, is to commit to a better diet. I don't eat terribly bad, but a year and a half of being on the road and eating very salty, very high calorie meals at chain restaurants, drinking soda, drinking a TON of coffee - you get the idea - has taken its toll on my system and I have to fix it. I've been conscious of this one for a while but after seeing what my BP was I'm a little scared. I need to find a decaf coffee that I can live with, because I don't see myself giving up coffee ever.

In any case, I'm on a tangent. I got the wheat pasta and sauce put together then made some of this double bergamot Earl Grey tea made - man I love this tea! Brand name is "Stash" - they sell it for $2.59 for 18 bags at Wegman's. If anybody can recommend to me an earl grey that they love, please by all means recommend it!

To top it off, Airwolf is on TV. This was an 80's show based around this super secret, super high tech helicopter. The acting is second rate and the script is so contrived... but this is one of those occasions where I'm a stereotypical guy.



Sexy.

Speaking of sexy, I love latinas.

Weird bit of 9/11 trivia - Airwolf episode #209 is titled "Flight #093 Is Missing."

Since @ajay has blessed us with his culinary knowlege for the paneer dish I am begging for a veggie curry recipe. Its my favorite. Help @ajay!

Wow. This picture is not altered in any way.



Nice wrinkle by the hairline there, honey!

Apparently this is caused by having the real human hair extensions, which are glued in, glued a tad too tight.

So, the lesson for celebrities - if you are going to glue someone elses hair into yours in order to improve your physical appearance, either make sure that its not so tight or don't sing, don't smile, look like a robot. Or else YOU TOO might look as gruesome as Beyonce does here.