More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
Even with the way the California DMV's collecting money from the poor, It's hard to believe the Recession's so bad because we have the news that Apple Computer's reporting record earnings for its fiscal fourth quarter, earning 1.67 billion on $1.82 per share, up from the $1.26 per share and $1.14 billion profit it took in a year ago.
With all that, fears of the impact of the new phone called Droid should be lessened because much of Apple's money was made from iPhone and MacBook sales. But we'll find out starting October 30th, just right around the corner.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
NY Times raids SF Chronicle in NY Times Bay Area edition
More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
The New York Times's new "San Francisco Bay Area" page edition is out, and has given quite a few members of the San Francisco Chronicle both print and online reasons to gripe or just plain cuss. The reason: the almost subject-for-subject and paragraph segment-by-segment borrowing of original SF Chronicle content.
Look, I'll tell ya, this blog post is designed to be a deliberate search engine torpedo. Something's got to get the cyber attention of the NY Times execs so this kind of questionably lazy work doesn't happen again.
The problem is the first story about Oakland's new police chief Tony Batts, or Anthony W. Batts", written by the NY Times' Jesse McKinley, who's the head of the San Francisco Bureau and has been since 2006, so he's new to our area.
What Jesse did was write an obvious quasi-replication of an older San Francisco Chronicle article dated August 18th 2009 "Oakland officers' killing led to Batts job"
McKinley's article released Friday, October 15th and called "New Oakland Police Chief Inherits a Force, and a City in Turmoil" wins points from me for its attention to search engine optimization in the title, but, as SF Chronicle Executive Editor at Large Phil Bronstein points out, has words and paragraphs ordered in such away that "there was just a gnawing deja vu sensation about it".
But my question is why, with the Bay Area story line being the 20th Anniversary of The Loma Prieta Quake, would Jesse McKinley chose to write a stale story almost three months old?
If the New York Times wanted to show it was really a part of the Bay Area, isn't the best move to write about and present an event unique to this area instead of the East Coast, knee-jerk, "Let's dial up the Oakland crime story!" habit?
Well, guess what? He did write about the quake celebrations but its in an area called "San Francisco Journal" and not on the new San Francisco Bay Area page online!
(And as I'm not an offline newspaper reader, but online, if the Times' intent was for the quake story to be part of their new Bay Area coverage even online and not the "San Francisco Journal" they really missed the Internet mark.)
Forget that Oakland too sustained a lot of damage from that disaster and that there are people around - like me - who have memories that are too painful to want to recall in a blog post, that story should have been the Times Bay Area opener.
I'm so confused! There's not even a widget to tell us about the Times' new Bay Area coverage on Jesse's Loma Prieta story; it's over at the article about Oakland's Police Chief Batts!
This is driving me batty. What was the NY Times thinking? What was going through Jesse's mind? And who's Jesse McKinley anyway?
McKinley looks for all the World like a young version of talk show host David Letterman, and like Letterman he was a New Yorker.
Heck, he probably knows Letterman.
Before his new job here in San Francisco, Mr. McKinley was best known for covering the New York cultural arts, specifically the New York theater scene. That's logical because according to McKinley's Linkedin profile, theater was his major at New York University. He has no real Bay Area ties such that he knows what "Tightwad Hill" is or for that matter who "Elihu Harris" is. He wasn't around for Loma Prieta and probably thinks "The Big Game" is Harvard v. Yale.
Geez,
Jesse, it's Cal v. Stanford. And if you need tips on who to root for just contact me, but here's a hint: GO BEARS!
The New York Times's new "San Francisco Bay Area" page edition is out, and has given quite a few members of the San Francisco Chronicle both print and online reasons to gripe or just plain cuss. The reason: the almost subject-for-subject and paragraph segment-by-segment borrowing of original SF Chronicle content.
Look, I'll tell ya, this blog post is designed to be a deliberate search engine torpedo. Something's got to get the cyber attention of the NY Times execs so this kind of questionably lazy work doesn't happen again.
The problem is the first story about Oakland's new police chief Tony Batts, or Anthony W. Batts", written by the NY Times' Jesse McKinley, who's the head of the San Francisco Bureau and has been since 2006, so he's new to our area.
What Jesse did was write an obvious quasi-replication of an older San Francisco Chronicle article dated August 18th 2009 "Oakland officers' killing led to Batts job"
McKinley's article released Friday, October 15th and called "New Oakland Police Chief Inherits a Force, and a City in Turmoil" wins points from me for its attention to search engine optimization in the title, but, as SF Chronicle Executive Editor at Large Phil Bronstein points out, has words and paragraphs ordered in such away that "there was just a gnawing deja vu sensation about it".
But my question is why, with the Bay Area story line being the 20th Anniversary of The Loma Prieta Quake, would Jesse McKinley chose to write a stale story almost three months old?
If the New York Times wanted to show it was really a part of the Bay Area, isn't the best move to write about and present an event unique to this area instead of the East Coast, knee-jerk, "Let's dial up the Oakland crime story!" habit?
Well, guess what? He did write about the quake celebrations but its in an area called "San Francisco Journal" and not on the new San Francisco Bay Area page online!
(And as I'm not an offline newspaper reader, but online, if the Times' intent was for the quake story to be part of their new Bay Area coverage even online and not the "San Francisco Journal" they really missed the Internet mark.)
Forget that Oakland too sustained a lot of damage from that disaster and that there are people around - like me - who have memories that are too painful to want to recall in a blog post, that story should have been the Times Bay Area opener.
I'm so confused! There's not even a widget to tell us about the Times' new Bay Area coverage on Jesse's Loma Prieta story; it's over at the article about Oakland's Police Chief Batts!
This is driving me batty. What was the NY Times thinking? What was going through Jesse's mind? And who's Jesse McKinley anyway?
A young David Letterman look-alike
Jesse McKinley
David Letterman
McKinley looks for all the World like a young version of talk show host David Letterman, and like Letterman he was a New Yorker.
Heck, he probably knows Letterman.
Before his new job here in San Francisco, Mr. McKinley was best known for covering the New York cultural arts, specifically the New York theater scene. That's logical because according to McKinley's Linkedin profile, theater was his major at New York University. He has no real Bay Area ties such that he knows what "Tightwad Hill" is or for that matter who "Elihu Harris" is. He wasn't around for Loma Prieta and probably thinks "The Big Game" is Harvard v. Yale.
Geez,
Jesse, it's Cal v. Stanford. And if you need tips on who to root for just contact me, but here's a hint: GO BEARS!
Angels baseball beats Yankees baseball 5-4: battle of payrolls
More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
The old saying: the more things change the more they stay the same. The Los Angeles Angels beat the New York Yankees 5-4 today in the AL Championship Series. They're back 2 games to one and could make a real game of it with another win.
But don't make the mistake of thinking that it was David beating Goliath, where the New York Yankees monster payroll was clobbered by the miserly fiscal practices of the Angels.
Ha!
The truth is that the 2009 player expeditures for both teams are not far off. The Yankees payroll was between $192 million and $201 million this year; the Angels payroll was at $113 million.
Both teams are part of the top six highest payrolls in Major League Baseball, proving that it takes money to win, even in this post-Moneyball era. This was supposed to be the time when the Internet and sabermetrics created a baseball team that could consistently when with a low payroll.
But the reality in 2009 is the same as it was in 1993 and in 2002 when I created the Oakland Baseball Simworld in partnership with Forio Business Simulations, and 2003 when University of San Francisco Professor Dan Rascher and I founded Sports Business Simulations.
Payroll rules.
Our simulation was and is designed to reflect both the "Moneyball" approach and the more common "Pay-To-Win" strategy, but it's the latter that's hard to beat.
In fact, Smith college Sports Economist Andrew Zimbalist (who's also a member of our simulation advisory board) determined that after 1990 there was a more powerful correlation between higher payrolls and team performance.
I tried for years to make a team "work" in the context of the current Oakland Coliseum using the Oakland Baseball Simworld (which I developed from scratch for the purpose of teaching marketing, business, and sports finance in high school and college classrooms and is based on my work at the City of Oakland). It's hard to achieve the 250 and up score that indicates baseball business success.
The only answer is to build a new stadium. Location aside - Oakland's better - it's the best tonic to turn any Oakland-based baseball team into a winner, including the one currently called The Oakland Athletics.
Meanwhile, the Yankees and Angels will keep being in the hunt for the World Series. Some things never change.
Angels win was a Money-ball story
The old saying: the more things change the more they stay the same. The Los Angeles Angels beat the New York Yankees 5-4 today in the AL Championship Series. They're back 2 games to one and could make a real game of it with another win.
But don't make the mistake of thinking that it was David beating Goliath, where the New York Yankees monster payroll was clobbered by the miserly fiscal practices of the Angels.
Ha!
The truth is that the 2009 player expeditures for both teams are not far off. The Yankees payroll was between $192 million and $201 million this year; the Angels payroll was at $113 million.
Both teams are part of the top six highest payrolls in Major League Baseball, proving that it takes money to win, even in this post-Moneyball era. This was supposed to be the time when the Internet and sabermetrics created a baseball team that could consistently when with a low payroll.
But the reality in 2009 is the same as it was in 1993 and in 2002 when I created the Oakland Baseball Simworld in partnership with Forio Business Simulations, and 2003 when University of San Francisco Professor Dan Rascher and I founded Sports Business Simulations.
Payroll rules.
Our simulation was and is designed to reflect both the "Moneyball" approach and the more common "Pay-To-Win" strategy, but it's the latter that's hard to beat.
In fact, Smith college Sports Economist Andrew Zimbalist (who's also a member of our simulation advisory board) determined that after 1990 there was a more powerful correlation between higher payrolls and team performance.
I tried for years to make a team "work" in the context of the current Oakland Coliseum using the Oakland Baseball Simworld (which I developed from scratch for the purpose of teaching marketing, business, and sports finance in high school and college classrooms and is based on my work at the City of Oakland). It's hard to achieve the 250 and up score that indicates baseball business success.
The only answer is to build a new stadium. Location aside - Oakland's better - it's the best tonic to turn any Oakland-based baseball team into a winner, including the one currently called The Oakland Athletics.
Meanwhile, the Yankees and Angels will keep being in the hunt for the World Series. Some things never change.
CA DMV - Do you know where your registration money goes?
More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
I just returned from another really harrowing experience with the California Department of Motor Vehicles office on Claremont Avenue in Oakland .
Between this and the taxi cab issue, and the Oakland parking problem, anti-car forces should not complain about California not charging enough to operate a car. In fact I've determined that many of them don't own cars; no bumming rides from me in the future, OK?
I think God's putting me through this just to shine a good media light on these problems. So be it. To that end, I got the email of the director George Valverde which I will not share, the DMV Twitter account, and his Twitter account, which I will share: @GVCADMV.
Mr. Valverde to date has been helpful in directing my emails, though we've not talked as of this writing, but it's these revelations below that really need to be looked into. It may be that he's not aware of what's happening under his nose. He should be.
What happens, and this is from the personal experience I have gone through complete with extensive notes and papers, is that the registration paid to the DMV is not immediately assigned to whatever citations a driver gets. Plus, it may take as long as three years before a ticket or toll violation is paid from DMV to FastTrak or the California municipality!
During that time you could wind up paying for a ticket twice and not be reimbursed - once to the DMV via registration or to clear a tow and once to the city or agency. How often this happens is not clear but I learned this from a very enterprising young man at the California vehicle collection division.
It was there that part of my horror started. They sent a "Demand for Payment" for an amount of money I already paid.
When I sent the cashier's check to prove it, it should have ended there, right? Nope. It got worse. Guess why?
They couldn't find it.
That's right. But the enterprising young man I'm taking about kept digging and determined that DMV never assigned my payment. Meanwhile the toll tickets I paid were gaining interest because FasTrak said they were not paid. It turned out that they never got the money from DMV. Now, that's not my fault - I gave them a cashier's check.
Turns out this happens to Californians more than a few times and especially when FasTrak's involved.
What's an outrage is that we allow this to go on without challenge or initiative. We as Californians worry more about being able to smoke weed than having correct and reasonable vehicle costs.
And the City of Oakland's not safe here either. It has parking records that are not accurately updated and suffer from the same DMV payment delay issues FasTrak has. I have seen three documents with three different amounts on them.
But what really galls me is today's discovery that DMV Sacramento can "at will" delay or adjust payments for you. It's up to how the manager looks at the situation - well, how the manager feels that day. It's discretionary, which means they can play favorites if they want to but it also means they can work to correct a mistake or at least not stick you with an obvious one.
Too much of what DMV does is so disjointed and uncoordinated that I'm really shocked the California Legislature hasn't called for an investigation. For example I got something like four different print letters from vehicle collections with different amounts. But a person in a good position at DMV told me today they should all be the same and not different.
This person also told me that the agency - like FasTrak - that requests the money from DMV sends the payment amount and DMV doens't double check it. In other words FasTrak can send one request for $50 and then up it to $100 within a month and DMV will not question it - meanwhile FasTrak's charging weekly interest to the cost. (Isn't that illegal? Don't we have usery laws here?)
It's no wonder an irate Yelp user referred to FasTrak's accounting practices in a way that points to some untoward intentions.
But. But. But. She says DMV expects the documents to have the same amount. Isn't that crazy-making? But she said in one sentence that DMV doesn't care what they're charge or how it changes - (my words now) because they're just going to stick you with it, anyway.
Someone's making some extra money here. I said this to one Oakland DMV office staffer today and she agreed. "Not me" she said. But someone is. This money trail's not adding up properly, yet everyone I talked to agrees there's a problem.
This is not a good situation for the State of California to be in as it looks like and feels like it's trying to cheat California residents to clear a massive budget deficit. I said it, and I challenge the DMV to show me that it doesn't look like that. It does.
Balancing the budget on the backs of California drivers is, to use a street term, just plain lame. Ok. It's criminal. Moreover, it's a highly regressive practice, hurting the poor more than anyone else. A sad state of affairs.
DMV: Where's the Money?
I just returned from another really harrowing experience with the California Department of Motor Vehicles office on Claremont Avenue in Oakland .
Between this and the taxi cab issue, and the Oakland parking problem, anti-car forces should not complain about California not charging enough to operate a car. In fact I've determined that many of them don't own cars; no bumming rides from me in the future, OK?
I think God's putting me through this just to shine a good media light on these problems. So be it. To that end, I got the email of the director George Valverde which I will not share, the DMV Twitter account, and his Twitter account, which I will share: @GVCADMV.
George Valverde
Mr. Valverde to date has been helpful in directing my emails, though we've not talked as of this writing, but it's these revelations below that really need to be looked into. It may be that he's not aware of what's happening under his nose. He should be.
What happens, and this is from the personal experience I have gone through complete with extensive notes and papers, is that the registration paid to the DMV is not immediately assigned to whatever citations a driver gets. Plus, it may take as long as three years before a ticket or toll violation is paid from DMV to FastTrak or the California municipality!
During that time you could wind up paying for a ticket twice and not be reimbursed - once to the DMV via registration or to clear a tow and once to the city or agency. How often this happens is not clear but I learned this from a very enterprising young man at the California vehicle collection division.
It was there that part of my horror started. They sent a "Demand for Payment" for an amount of money I already paid.
When I sent the cashier's check to prove it, it should have ended there, right? Nope. It got worse. Guess why?
They couldn't find it.
That's right. But the enterprising young man I'm taking about kept digging and determined that DMV never assigned my payment. Meanwhile the toll tickets I paid were gaining interest because FasTrak said they were not paid. It turned out that they never got the money from DMV. Now, that's not my fault - I gave them a cashier's check.
Turns out this happens to Californians more than a few times and especially when FasTrak's involved.
What's an outrage is that we allow this to go on without challenge or initiative. We as Californians worry more about being able to smoke weed than having correct and reasonable vehicle costs.
And the City of Oakland's not safe here either. It has parking records that are not accurately updated and suffer from the same DMV payment delay issues FasTrak has. I have seen three documents with three different amounts on them.
But what really galls me is today's discovery that DMV Sacramento can "at will" delay or adjust payments for you. It's up to how the manager looks at the situation - well, how the manager feels that day. It's discretionary, which means they can play favorites if they want to but it also means they can work to correct a mistake or at least not stick you with an obvious one.
Too much of what DMV does is so disjointed and uncoordinated that I'm really shocked the California Legislature hasn't called for an investigation. For example I got something like four different print letters from vehicle collections with different amounts. But a person in a good position at DMV told me today they should all be the same and not different.
This person also told me that the agency - like FasTrak - that requests the money from DMV sends the payment amount and DMV doens't double check it. In other words FasTrak can send one request for $50 and then up it to $100 within a month and DMV will not question it - meanwhile FasTrak's charging weekly interest to the cost. (Isn't that illegal? Don't we have usery laws here?)
It's no wonder an irate Yelp user referred to FasTrak's accounting practices in a way that points to some untoward intentions.
But. But. But. She says DMV expects the documents to have the same amount. Isn't that crazy-making? But she said in one sentence that DMV doesn't care what they're charge or how it changes - (my words now) because they're just going to stick you with it, anyway.
Someone's making some extra money here. I said this to one Oakland DMV office staffer today and she agreed. "Not me" she said. But someone is. This money trail's not adding up properly, yet everyone I talked to agrees there's a problem.
This is not a good situation for the State of California to be in as it looks like and feels like it's trying to cheat California residents to clear a massive budget deficit. I said it, and I challenge the DMV to show me that it doesn't look like that. It does.
Balancing the budget on the backs of California drivers is, to use a street term, just plain lame. Ok. It's criminal. Moreover, it's a highly regressive practice, hurting the poor more than anyone else. A sad state of affairs.
Brees-ing Past Marino's Mark? FRO's 2009 Drew Brees Watch
Brees-ing Past Marino's Mark?
FRO's 2009 Drew Brees Watch
By Jon Wagner Sr. Writer at Large Football Reporters Online
One year after passing for the second most yards (5,069) in an NFL season, only 15 yards behind Hall Of Fame quarterback Dan Marino's single-season record of 5,084 yards in 1984, New Orleans Saints' quarterback Drew Brees is again poised to take aim at Marino's record. FRO follows Brees' prusuit of Marino each week, throughout the season:
Brees’ 2009 Avg. Yards Per Game: 280.00
Avg. Yards Needed To Pass Marino: 307.08
WEEK DATE OPP/RESULT COMP-ATT % TD-INT YARDS REMAINING
1 Sun 9/13 vs DET W, 45-27 26-34 76.5 6-1 358 4,727
2 Sun 9/20 at PHI W, 48-22 25-34 73.5 3-1 311 4,416
3 Sun 9/27 at BUF W, 27-7 16-29 55.2 0-0 172 4,244
4 Sun 10/4 vs NYJ W, 24-10 20-32 62.5 0-0 190 4,054
5 Bye
6 Sun 10/18 vs NYG W, 48-27 23-30 76.7 4-0 369 3,685
7 Sun 10/25 at MIA
8 Mon 11/2 vs ATL
9 Sun 11/8 vs CAR
10 Sun 11/15 at STL
11 Sun 11/22 at TB
12 Mon 11/30 vs NE
13 Sun 12/6 at WAS
14 Sun 12/13 at ATL
15 Sat 12/19 vs DAL
16 Sun 12/27 vs TB
17 Sun 1/3 at CAR
PF-PA COMP-ATT % TD-INT YDS
TOTALS; 192-93 110-159 69.2 13-2 1,400
Oakland talk at the Lake Chalet
More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
This is just an FYI but I'm planning an occasional meetup at the Oakland Lake Chalet to do a live stream show and video for one hour where we talk about Oakland and the news in general.
I'm doing the first one as an experiment this Wednesday at 5 PM and to 6 PM. If you're in the area, stop by. IF you can't you will be able to find us at USTREAM.tv and my blogs.
The Lake Chalet is at 1520 Lakeside Drive in Oakland. The map is here:
View Larger Map
I totally recommend the burger - best in Oakland.
This is just an FYI but I'm planning an occasional meetup at the Oakland Lake Chalet to do a live stream show and video for one hour where we talk about Oakland and the news in general.
I'm doing the first one as an experiment this Wednesday at 5 PM and to 6 PM. If you're in the area, stop by. IF you can't you will be able to find us at USTREAM.tv and my blogs.
The Lake Chalet is at 1520 Lakeside Drive in Oakland. The map is here:
View Larger Map
I totally recommend the burger - best in Oakland.
Angry Cab Driver abandons car in Oakland - follow-up
More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
Some thoughts on the Oakland cab problem in the wake of my video and blog. The video is below if you missed it:
Has this happened to you? If so, send an email.
UPDATE: reader email from Adam:
The matter of fixing the cab system in Oakland has been put on the backburner for years. Decades. Aside from Friendly Cab's strangle hold on the Oakland cab market, the media has been almost silent on this issue.
If this were an African American East Oakland crime video it would have been placed where it could get the most attention. In other words, showing society's ills is more valuable than showing those of the institutions that cause them.
But that aside, the Oakland Cab system needs to be fixed. This matter of single company control and bad driver behavior is allowed to go uncontested and unchallenged. I was told the City Manager's Office staffer Barbara Kiley is the person responsible for taxi cab issues in Oakland.
More soon.
Some thoughts on the Oakland cab problem in the wake of my video and blog. The video is below if you missed it:
Has this happened to you? If so, send an email.
UPDATE: reader email from Adam:
I'm sorry that's happened to you. Here in West Oakland, often times the
cabs won't even come at all, even after repeated calls to the cab
dispatcher.
The solution, however, is not more laws, as you suggested in your
column. The solution is to end the monopoly that Friendly Cab has in
Oakland. Open the city up to more cab companies, and there will be
economic consequences for cabbies who don't feel like doing their jobs.
The matter of fixing the cab system in Oakland has been put on the backburner for years. Decades. Aside from Friendly Cab's strangle hold on the Oakland cab market, the media has been almost silent on this issue.
If this were an African American East Oakland crime video it would have been placed where it could get the most attention. In other words, showing society's ills is more valuable than showing those of the institutions that cause them.
But that aside, the Oakland Cab system needs to be fixed. This matter of single company control and bad driver behavior is allowed to go uncontested and unchallenged. I was told the City Manager's Office staffer Barbara Kiley is the person responsible for taxi cab issues in Oakland.
More soon.
Angry Cab Driver abandons car - and me - in Oakland
More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
What happened to me on Sunday October 18th should not happen to anyone in Oakland, or anywhere.
I was just going to go into San Francisco to catch up with my friend who was finishing the Nike Women's Marathon. I called "Friendly Cab" to take me from my place near Lake Merritt in Oakland to 19th Street BART Station in downtown Oakland.
I was in a hurry to get there as it was around 3 PM, so even though its just about a mile away I figured cabbing it, as they say, was faster.
So the cab - car number 236 - showed up as I was standing out there early. Well, what happed was the cab driver activated this automated call system that says "Welcome to DDS; your cab has arrived." Well I went out to meet the vehicle and there was no cab for a solid four minutes of time. Then he rounded the corner.
I got in the cab and calmly and normally explained where I was going. So the cabbie starts down a street such that once he got to Grand Avenue he would pass through five stop lights before we got to Grand and Harrison. I figured the cabbie could just turn right and use a faster path without stop lights.
But once he did as I really asked him to do without a second thought, he slowed the cab down and tried to just go deliberately slow. I asked if something was wrong. I explained that I was trying to meet my friend and it would be great if he could go faster. I then said I would give him a good tip if he helped out in that way.
So we rounded the corner on Lenox Avenue and all of a sudden the guy pulls over at what was the driveway of an apartment complex at 325 Lenox - without warning and blocking the driveway - then gets out of the car and says I can have the cab but he's going to secure it and then, yelling frantically, ordered me to take my bag out of it. He also said, "You can call the police."
At that point I pulled out my Flip Video Camera and turned it on.
The video tells the rest of the story.
As you can see, he just takes his stuff and walks off. I got on the phone and told the cab company what happened. I also explained that I was making a video of the incident. I wasn't angry at the time; more like surprised and confused because I didn't say anything mean to him and there was no argument until he flew the coup.
I called Friendly Cab and the guy who came over to get me was someone I'd had as a driver before and is a very professional person. He took me to BART without charging me.
But that's happened to me before but it was in 2007.
I was returning from the Miami Super Bowl and got a cab near 12th Street BART in downtown Oakland to go home. The cab driver did not like that I asked to go down Franklin rather than some weird and costly route combination he had in mind. So he stopped and as he was getting me to leave his car I called the Oakland Police.
They took me home.
Now all of this seems to be just because I make a request that any customer has the right to make. But here in Oakland we have cab drivers who seem to want you to spend more money than you should and then try to abuse you when you don't let them. Here's my evidence.
There should be some kind of law against this action by cab driver as its dangerous. Suppose I was left in an area where I could be robber or worse? And all for what? Because I want to go my way? Come on!
This has gone on for sometime and the City of Oakland has done nothing about it. The City of Oakland has allowed one cab company, Friendly Cab, to maintain a monopoly and in turn maintain some drivers who treat Oaklanders like this guy treated me. But the company does have some good and fair drivers who I know - just not that guy.
That cab driver is not the norm in San Francisco, where cabbies really know their stuff and take pride in what they do. Plus, there's more competition. In Oakland its like they're doing you a favor rather than providing a service.
Also there's an element of racism of a different kind here: a black man cabbie who does not want another black man passenger to "give him an order," even if taking that order part of the deal of being a cab driver.
And that's the rub: it wasn't "an order" but a request I as a customer have a right to make. I was not acting weird or diva-ish and I talk to everyone. I even asked the cabbie about the warm weather before he went AWOL.
Something has to be done. I also am explaining my personal fear because that guy knows where I live and was nutty enough to take the action of walking off. What will he do when he can't get work because of his actions?
I have no idea.
But I do know that I had to show this. I had to take action to show people what's really wrong in Oakland from the position of how Oaklanders are treated. Be it parking or this, the City of Oakland does not take care of its people.
Isn't it time for that to change? I think so. Once again, the City of Oakland, and this time its taxi detail, needs to make a better place and stop maintaining a cab system that harms Oaklanders.
What happened to me on Sunday October 18th should not happen to anyone in Oakland, or anywhere.
I was just going to go into San Francisco to catch up with my friend who was finishing the Nike Women's Marathon. I called "Friendly Cab" to take me from my place near Lake Merritt in Oakland to 19th Street BART Station in downtown Oakland.
I was in a hurry to get there as it was around 3 PM, so even though its just about a mile away I figured cabbing it, as they say, was faster.
So the cab - car number 236 - showed up as I was standing out there early. Well, what happed was the cab driver activated this automated call system that says "Welcome to DDS; your cab has arrived." Well I went out to meet the vehicle and there was no cab for a solid four minutes of time. Then he rounded the corner.
I got in the cab and calmly and normally explained where I was going. So the cabbie starts down a street such that once he got to Grand Avenue he would pass through five stop lights before we got to Grand and Harrison. I figured the cabbie could just turn right and use a faster path without stop lights.
But once he did as I really asked him to do without a second thought, he slowed the cab down and tried to just go deliberately slow. I asked if something was wrong. I explained that I was trying to meet my friend and it would be great if he could go faster. I then said I would give him a good tip if he helped out in that way.
So we rounded the corner on Lenox Avenue and all of a sudden the guy pulls over at what was the driveway of an apartment complex at 325 Lenox - without warning and blocking the driveway - then gets out of the car and says I can have the cab but he's going to secure it and then, yelling frantically, ordered me to take my bag out of it. He also said, "You can call the police."
At that point I pulled out my Flip Video Camera and turned it on.
The video tells the rest of the story.
As you can see, he just takes his stuff and walks off. I got on the phone and told the cab company what happened. I also explained that I was making a video of the incident. I wasn't angry at the time; more like surprised and confused because I didn't say anything mean to him and there was no argument until he flew the coup.
I called Friendly Cab and the guy who came over to get me was someone I'd had as a driver before and is a very professional person. He took me to BART without charging me.
But that's happened to me before but it was in 2007.
I was returning from the Miami Super Bowl and got a cab near 12th Street BART in downtown Oakland to go home. The cab driver did not like that I asked to go down Franklin rather than some weird and costly route combination he had in mind. So he stopped and as he was getting me to leave his car I called the Oakland Police.
They took me home.
Now all of this seems to be just because I make a request that any customer has the right to make. But here in Oakland we have cab drivers who seem to want you to spend more money than you should and then try to abuse you when you don't let them. Here's my evidence.
There should be some kind of law against this action by cab driver as its dangerous. Suppose I was left in an area where I could be robber or worse? And all for what? Because I want to go my way? Come on!
This has gone on for sometime and the City of Oakland has done nothing about it. The City of Oakland has allowed one cab company, Friendly Cab, to maintain a monopoly and in turn maintain some drivers who treat Oaklanders like this guy treated me. But the company does have some good and fair drivers who I know - just not that guy.
That cab driver is not the norm in San Francisco, where cabbies really know their stuff and take pride in what they do. Plus, there's more competition. In Oakland its like they're doing you a favor rather than providing a service.
Also there's an element of racism of a different kind here: a black man cabbie who does not want another black man passenger to "give him an order," even if taking that order part of the deal of being a cab driver.
And that's the rub: it wasn't "an order" but a request I as a customer have a right to make. I was not acting weird or diva-ish and I talk to everyone. I even asked the cabbie about the warm weather before he went AWOL.
Something has to be done. I also am explaining my personal fear because that guy knows where I live and was nutty enough to take the action of walking off. What will he do when he can't get work because of his actions?
I have no idea.
But I do know that I had to show this. I had to take action to show people what's really wrong in Oakland from the position of how Oaklanders are treated. Be it parking or this, the City of Oakland does not take care of its people.
Isn't it time for that to change? I think so. Once again, the City of Oakland, and this time its taxi detail, needs to make a better place and stop maintaining a cab system that harms Oaklanders.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Droid does more than iPhone; AT&T should worry because its service is crappy
Droid
I'm really looking forward to this new phone called Droid, which is supposed to be released October 30th. Here's why in this video and my story that follows it:
I was a devoted user of the iPhone until AT&T's really frankly dishonest handling of my bill made me just drop using it cold turkey and buy a Blackberry as a temporary replacement. I'm not a fan of the Blackberry much - what I do like is the video feature and the Internet teathering, which I have made use of.
(That allows you to access the Internet using your Blackberry.)
And the way it allowed for great mobile blogging as shown here:
But that written my Blackberry does a lot of things I can't stand. For one it makes these automatic calls to several friends of mine and my Mother for reasons I can't even explain.
Something else it does is manage to erase my personal address book so I can't delete the numbers that are being robo-called.
Then I can't effectively mobile blog with it as I could with my iPhone.
Yes, I tried to jailbreak the IPhone but whatever I did, it started making emergency calls. Great.
So I have been literally trapped with this quirky but effective Blackberry, all the while wishing I could use my iPhone free of the clutches of AT&T.
Clutches.
This is what happened with AT&T.
Two years ago I disputed an "auto-pay" credit card charge on my phone bill and had American Express reject it. AT&T agreed to the adjustment but someone there kept replacing the charge, triggering more charge dispute claims by me, and AT&T agreeing with them.
Then in 2008 AT&T placed a charge of $1,033.36 on my credit card bill each month - and I disputed it each month. Then on August, I think it was the 8th, on a conference call between an AMEX representative, an AT&T representative, and myself, AT&T agreed to not place a charge that its own people called "erroneous" on my bill.
Then shockingly last November AT&T put the same charge back on my bill. But this time I was talking to a whole different set of people who said the charge wasn't wrong and came up with a weird explanation that did not pass the logic test.
More important, they did nothing at all to ease my pain caused by this billing nightmare. Nothing. It's not like correctly the matter is going to have their stock price drop. Or for that matter, why not just agree to the settlement I offered which was for them to reduce the collection to a one-time fee of $400.
Remember, this $1,033.36 bill was on my account each month! Understand? It was some weird auto-pay glitch that in March of 2008 an AT&T rep told me was an error on their part.
So with all that I had to stop using my iPhone just to get away from AT&T. I really can't stand how they do business at all. They're the masters of deception and unfair practices in the cell phone business in my view.
I have an account now with T-Mobile and I could not be happier. It's one payment monthly and it barely changes. I can count on it.
But I miss my iPhone.
Now, I read Droid's suppose to outperform the iPhone and its on the Verizon 4G network. That's great, just keepAT&T away from it!
Cal beats UCLA 45 to 26; Cal not in BCS Standings?
More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com
The Cal Golden Bears got the win they (we) needed Saturday with a 45 to 26 win over the hated UCLA Bruins, marking the first time Cal Football Head
Coach Jeff Tedford has won at the Rose Bowl in his time with Cal.
Congrats Coach Tedford!
The win gives us a 4 and 2 overall record, and it was all heart, frankly. Some things in the scheme department to rave about but plenty in the execution area to be happy with. But what vexes me is the BCS standings just released today: Cal's not in them.
But before I get to that, let's go back to that matter of running plays. Hats off to Heisman Trophy Candidate Javhid Best, who ran for 102 yards, discovered cutback running. Not that he's failed to do it before, but the 93 yard run was the best one I've seen him do. Plain and simple. See for yourself:
Cal's other star running back on Saturday was Shane Vereen, who gained 154 yards, most of it replacing the ill Best. But he did it out of a very well-designed set of running plays, one a draw play that was so smoothly executed by Cal QB Kevin Riley, it looked as if he had the ball even after he gave it to Vereen.
Another surprise was Riley himself running the ball out of a spread formation. Cal's done it before but had it tucked away for a few games until UCLA.
Offensively it wasn't Cal using a trick play but plays smartly designed to get the ball to their best players. Take the 2nd quarter play action pass to Best running out of the I Formation.
It's a play that requires the offensive line to hold their blocks after the play fake a bit longer than I'd like, because Best comes out of the tailback position to run a fly pattern. In this game it worked - Best caught the ball and scored 52-yards downfield - but I can see a defensive coordinator calling a six-rusher blitz in the future; UCLA only sent four people.
At any rate, it was a great and much needed win. Offensively Cal needs to install more true rollout passes and I'd like to see more of the system I've called for before, but a win's a win.
Now about that BCS thing.
The BCS (Bowl Championship Series) rankings were released today, and Cal was no where to be seen.
Florida, Alabama, Texas, Boise State, and Cincinnati are ranked 1 through 5. USC, TCU, LSU, Miami, Fla, and Oregon are 6 through 10. Here's the list:
First 2009 BCS Poll
1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Boise State
5. Cincinnati
6. Iowa
7. USC
8. TCU
9. LSU
10. Miami (FL)
11. Oregon
12. Georgia Tech
13. Penn State
14. Virginia Tech
15. Oklahoma State
16. Brigham Young
17. Houston
18. Utah
19. Ohio State
20. Pittsburgh
21. Wisconsin
22. Arizona
23. West Virginia
24. South Carolina
25. Kansas
It's a crowded field, with a whole bunch of one-loss teams, and four two-loss teams, including (huh?) Arizona (4 and 2) is there. We're (Cal) 1-2 in the conference, whereas Arizona is 2-1. So we've really got to turn on the jets to get into BCS land and UCLA was a great start. Washington State, at 0-4, is the next home game and every bit as important as this one. Arizona now faces a desperate UCLA team: a loss could be just the tonic we need to enter the BCS picture.
Of course the BCS system is more complicated than that, but let's put it this way: for now we want to root for UCLA to beat Arizona Saturday.
GO BEARS!
The Cal Golden Bears got the win they (we) needed Saturday with a 45 to 26 win over the hated UCLA Bruins, marking the first time Cal Football Head
Coach Jeff Tedford has won at the Rose Bowl in his time with Cal.
Congrats Coach Tedford!
The win gives us a 4 and 2 overall record, and it was all heart, frankly. Some things in the scheme department to rave about but plenty in the execution area to be happy with. But what vexes me is the BCS standings just released today: Cal's not in them.
But before I get to that, let's go back to that matter of running plays. Hats off to Heisman Trophy Candidate Javhid Best, who ran for 102 yards, discovered cutback running. Not that he's failed to do it before, but the 93 yard run was the best one I've seen him do. Plain and simple. See for yourself:
Cal's other star running back on Saturday was Shane Vereen, who gained 154 yards, most of it replacing the ill Best. But he did it out of a very well-designed set of running plays, one a draw play that was so smoothly executed by Cal QB Kevin Riley, it looked as if he had the ball even after he gave it to Vereen.
Another surprise was Riley himself running the ball out of a spread formation. Cal's done it before but had it tucked away for a few games until UCLA.
Offensively it wasn't Cal using a trick play but plays smartly designed to get the ball to their best players. Take the 2nd quarter play action pass to Best running out of the I Formation.
It's a play that requires the offensive line to hold their blocks after the play fake a bit longer than I'd like, because Best comes out of the tailback position to run a fly pattern. In this game it worked - Best caught the ball and scored 52-yards downfield - but I can see a defensive coordinator calling a six-rusher blitz in the future; UCLA only sent four people.
At any rate, it was a great and much needed win. Offensively Cal needs to install more true rollout passes and I'd like to see more of the system I've called for before, but a win's a win.
Now about that BCS thing.
The BCS (Bowl Championship Series) rankings were released today, and Cal was no where to be seen.
Florida, Alabama, Texas, Boise State, and Cincinnati are ranked 1 through 5. USC, TCU, LSU, Miami, Fla, and Oregon are 6 through 10. Here's the list:
First 2009 BCS Poll
1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Boise State
5. Cincinnati
6. Iowa
7. USC
8. TCU
9. LSU
10. Miami (FL)
11. Oregon
12. Georgia Tech
13. Penn State
14. Virginia Tech
15. Oklahoma State
16. Brigham Young
17. Houston
18. Utah
19. Ohio State
20. Pittsburgh
21. Wisconsin
22. Arizona
23. West Virginia
24. South Carolina
25. Kansas
It's a crowded field, with a whole bunch of one-loss teams, and four two-loss teams, including (huh?) Arizona (4 and 2) is there. We're (Cal) 1-2 in the conference, whereas Arizona is 2-1. So we've really got to turn on the jets to get into BCS land and UCLA was a great start. Washington State, at 0-4, is the next home game and every bit as important as this one. Arizona now faces a desperate UCLA team: a loss could be just the tonic we need to enter the BCS picture.
Of course the BCS system is more complicated than that, but let's put it this way: for now we want to root for UCLA to beat Arizona Saturday.
GO BEARS!
SB XLII Lessons Versus Saints Could Pave Giants’ Road To SB XLIV
SB XLII Lessons Versus Saints Could Pave Giants’ Road To SB XLIV
By Jon Wagner Sr. Writer at Large Football Reporters Online
(photos: Former Giant Jeremy Shockey shown here in 2007 at Giants camp, has found a home with the Saints-By A.F. Chachkes)
Twenty months ago, when the New York Giants shocked the football world by beating the heavily favored, undefeated New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLII, a certain recipe made such a stunning upset possible.
There were plenty of significant, contributing factors in that historic victory, like a key 45-yard reception by tight end Kevin Boss (setting up the Giants’ first touchdown), New York limiting their mistakes (committing just one turnover and only four penalties), and the Giants stopping the run (allowing just 45 yards on only 16 carries).
More than anything though, three specific things were primarily responsible for making the Giants unexpected champions on that February day in 2008: The Giants used a long game-opening drive, a relentless pass rush, and the continued great play of quarterback Eli Manning, the Most Valuable Player of Super Bowl XLII.
Prior to the game, the questions abounded of how the Giants could possibly stop a team which just concluded the most productive regular season in Super Bowl history. How could New York keep the record-setting Patriots off the scoreboard enough to win? The Giants provided the answer on the game’s first drive, by winning the opening coin toss and not letting New England’s offense touch the ball until 5:01 remained in the first quarter. Even though that drive ended with only a field goal and a modest 3-0 Giants’ lead, New York went 63 yards on 16 plays, in a Super Bowl record 9:59, setting a tone for the rest of the game that the 14-point favorite was in for a battle, and there would be no cakewalk in the Arizona desert.
Although New England answered with a touchdown on the game’s next possession, the Giants wouldn’t allow another score until late in the fourth quarter, hitting and pressuring Patriots’ quarterback Tom Brady all game, introducing him, and very often reintroducing him, to the University Of Phoenix Stadium turf. The Giants hit Brady nine times, sacked him five times for total losses of 37 yards, deflected four passes, forced a fumble, and recovered another.
And, the third key ingredient to the upset of all football upsets was Manning remaining hot after a terrific four-game playoff run to help the Giants reach Super Bowl XLII. Manning making plays, and allowing his wide receivers to do the same (like the famous and incredible ball-pinned-to-the-helmet catch by wide receiver David Tyree) was the final main component of the Giants achieving the previously unthinkable.
So, why relive all of this now, as the 5-0, 2009 version of the Giants prepare to battle the 4-0 Saints on Sunday? Well, because the Superdome showdown at 1pm EST features arguably the two best teams in the NFL right now, and the winner of Sunday’s contest could be in the driver’s seat toward getting the top seed in the NFC playoffs -- even though Minnesota (5-0), Atlanta (3-1), Chicago (3-1), or even a surprise team like last year’s 9-7 Arizona Cardinals might still have something to say about that.
A strong argument could be made that the Giants would be better served playing as a lower seed and on the road in the playoffs, given Manning’s playoff success two seasons ago (away from Giants Stadium for three straight playoff games plus Super Bowl XLII, as the Giants won a championship as a five seed) contrasted with his awful performance in the Giants’ playoff loss to Philadelphia as a one seed, playing in the very windy conditions of The Meadowlands last January.
Still, any NFL player or coach would likely say that there are three main goals in a season: 1) Win the division, 2) Try to get the one seed, even if Manning is your quarterback and swirling winds in your home stadium wreak havoc with your playoff passing game, and 3) Try to ride the top seed to a Super Bowl title.
The second reason the Giants’ aforementioned win over the Patriots is relevant on Sunday is because as in Super Bowl XLII, the Giants have a great defense and a hot Eli Manning again facing the NFL’s best offense. The Saints lead the league with 36.0 points per game, and rank third with 414.3 total yards per game, but New York, thanks in large part to Manning, is right behind New Orleans, ranking second, with 417.4 total yards per game. Defensively, the Giants have given up just 14.2 points per game (second only to Denver’s 8.6 ppg), and by a wide margin, have allowed both the NFL’s fewest total yards (210.6 per game; Denver is second with 252.8 ypg) and the least passing yards (104.8 per game; Carolina is second with 165.8 ypg) in the league. If the Giants can pressure Saints’ superstar quarterback Drew Brees the same way they got to Brady in Super Bowl XLII, it should spell success for New York.
Now, back to that long drive against New England for a moment… the Giants did the same as recently as last week, imposing their will, albeit against a far inferior opponent, going on a game-opening touchdown drive which consumed 8:03, en route to a 44-7 rout of Oakland. If the Giants’ offensive line can similarly help control the clock and keep Brees and his dangerous receiving and rushing compliments off the field, that would be another huge step toward a victory on Sunday.
And, to finish it off, again, the play of Manning, who is playing his best football so far this season since that magical four-game run through the 2007 playoffs and Super Bowl XLII. Manning has a 111.2 passer rating, completing over 64 percent of his passes, while throwing 10 touchdown passes and just two interceptions so far this season. But, most of all, he’s winning: 5-0 so far in 2009. Continuing that success on Sunday would be the final piece needed to produce yet another Giants’ win.
The possibility of gaining an eventual number one seed in the NFC playoffs by beating the Saints will certainly be enough motivation for the Giants’ offensive leader. However, there might be additional inspiration on a personal level for Manning, who holds a special fondness for the city in which he was raised during the first 18 years of his life. His father, Archie Manning, played in the Superdome for 12 seasons, from 1971-1982 (son Eli, was born just after the 1981 season), but Eli has never played a game there, though he attended many at the Superdome while growing up in New Orleans. Manning and the Giants were supposed to play in the Superdome in 2005, but the game was moved to Giants Stadium due to Hurricane Katrina, after which Manning visited shelters and the homes of his family in the area.
Since there’s still a lot of football left in 2009, Sunday’s tilt between the Giants and Saints could prove to mean little in the 2009 NFC playoff picture. But, if a New York win in New Orleans indeed decides the NFC’s number one seed a little more than two months from now, the lessons learned from the Giants’ Super Bowl XLII victory might just pave the Giants’ road to Super Bowl XLIV.
THE FANTASY FIXX-Week 6(last minute help!)
THE FANTASY FIXX-By David Ortega for Football Reporters Online
“Craving more fantasy football notes and numbers, get your weekly fix here.”-Thee Prodigy
Target Practice: Week Six in the NFL
Once again if you are hoping to set a winning lineup for the coming weekend, you’re going to need the recipe for success. And like all good recipes, you need some tasty ingredients that will make your mouth water.
Not sure if this guy is for real or if that guy can do it again, then dig a little deeper and take a look at the numbers; numbers don’t lie. With week six approaching fast, there’s no time to stumble, take aim because you’ve targeted the right place and we’ve got your fix.
Who’s worried….
Put him in a new uniform and in a new city and the old Braylon Edwards returns making one exciting grab after the other. Monday night was a trip down memory lane for some and a reminder of what Edwards is capable of doing when he gets the opportunity. It looks like the change of scenery is working well for Braylon who finished Monday’s game with five catches, but most notable were the 11 total passes thrown his direction. His total numbers in week five didn’t set any houses on fire, but it looks like this Edwards and “Kid Sensation” could just be getting started.
It took one question about the chemistry between he and his quarterback to spark the Bronco’s second year receiver Eddie Royal. Last week when asked, Orton responded that there were no issues, that he and Royal had a great mix; 15 passes and 10 receptions later and I would say he was right.
It certainly appears that Wes Welker is back or at least Tom Brady seems to think so. Welker has been slowed with a knee injury this season, but that has not stopped his quarterback from calling his number. In Welker’s last two games he’s only total 134 yards receiving with 14 catches, but the truth is Brady has looked his way 26 times. At some point Welker will start putting up his normal numbers, and as long as he’s healthy enough to go, expect to see Brady look his way.
Keep your Eye on these gems…
Last week the rookie in Philly, Jeremy Maclin blew up for big yards and two scores. On the afternoon, McNabb pulled the trigger on his newest weapon eight times and the two connected twice for long strikes; a 51 yard touchdown pass and a 40 yard touchdown pass. Over the past two games Maclin has been targeted just 15 times, but after Sunday’s showcase you can bet that number will rise.
In Denver with so many weapons in the passing game there hardly seems to be any chance for any other receivers not named Marshall or Royal. Well that doesn’t appear to be the case for wide receiver Jabar Gaffney. He’s not been the most productive option in Denver, but he has no fewer that four targets in a single game this season and eight last Sunday were the most. With the offense seeming to be heating up (48 pass attempts last week), Gaffney could become more relevant than what most thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)