What makes a house worth $49,500,000? --- the asking price for a property in SW Miami featured in a well-known realtor's full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal today.
I took a peek at the web site and had a visual tour of the house inside and out. I don't know if what I saw is worth the asking price, and I don't plan on tapping my 401K to even visit - but it is mind-bending at this time to think someone has the faith in the American dream to ask this price and expect someone will come forward. Most likely a prospect will counter-offer and the price might drop a mil or two but forty-seven mil for a house? It does have a helluva view of the water!
By the way, more than 700 viewers had viewed the web site as of mid-morning!
Showing posts with label Salesmanship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Salesmanship. Show all posts
Saturday, May 30
Wednesday, April 15
Food - thinking about it
Recently I have been giving some thought - more than usual - to food. Perhaps this occurs because food, including the lack of sufficient food in parts of the world, is the recent topic of our Charleston area study group's bi-weekly discussion.
My thoughts, however, are more local in nature than the world-wide supply and demand. In recent weeks I have been to different places where food is being offered at reduced prices and in ways to attract more business. In an upscale downtown restaurant, sampler meals were offered. For $30, $40 or $60 you could sample one or more items off the appetizer, entrée and desert menus, along with some rolls and non-alcoholic beverage. A second place, a family style restaurant, offers prime rib for $9.95 on special nights of the week. The third venue offered two meals for the the price of one on three nights early in the week.
Another observation has to do with how much food is served, eaten and wasted. From the discussion group readings it is clear that people in many parts of the world do not have enough to eat either because it is not available or they cannot afford it. Recently in a restaurant the waiter asked if we wanted bread. I said "yes" and simultaneously my companion said "no." So he waiter brought four rolls to the table. I ate one and at the end of the meal asked what would happen to the three remaining in the bread basket. They would be thrown out, he said, unless you take them home. I took them home and ate two of them at breakfast the following morning.
In the dining room of the nursing facility where my wife lives the amount of food that is not eaten and goes into the disposal is troubling to me. The food is basic, well prepared and in most cases palatable. (I eat an occasional sample meal there to stay abreast of my wife's care.) Similar events can be observed in the dining room at the retirement community where I live. In restaurants I am often amazed at the amount of food carried away from tables. It appears to me that Americans waste a tremendous amount of food.
At the same time I understand restaurants serve large portions to attract customers, drum up new and repeat business and stay solvent. Skimpy portions mean dissatisfied customers who are not likely to return. What is about us that we will leave food on our plate and have it thrown in the garbage rather than settle up front for a smaller serving?
Perhaps your own experiences are similar. Perhaps not. Food is a subject too often taken for granted in America because we have so much of it. Should we look at it differently? I would like to hear your views.
E-mail me at arch@archibald99.com or comment on this blog.
My thoughts, however, are more local in nature than the world-wide supply and demand. In recent weeks I have been to different places where food is being offered at reduced prices and in ways to attract more business. In an upscale downtown restaurant, sampler meals were offered. For $30, $40 or $60 you could sample one or more items off the appetizer, entrée and desert menus, along with some rolls and non-alcoholic beverage. A second place, a family style restaurant, offers prime rib for $9.95 on special nights of the week. The third venue offered two meals for the the price of one on three nights early in the week.
Another observation has to do with how much food is served, eaten and wasted. From the discussion group readings it is clear that people in many parts of the world do not have enough to eat either because it is not available or they cannot afford it. Recently in a restaurant the waiter asked if we wanted bread. I said "yes" and simultaneously my companion said "no." So he waiter brought four rolls to the table. I ate one and at the end of the meal asked what would happen to the three remaining in the bread basket. They would be thrown out, he said, unless you take them home. I took them home and ate two of them at breakfast the following morning.
In the dining room of the nursing facility where my wife lives the amount of food that is not eaten and goes into the disposal is troubling to me. The food is basic, well prepared and in most cases palatable. (I eat an occasional sample meal there to stay abreast of my wife's care.) Similar events can be observed in the dining room at the retirement community where I live. In restaurants I am often amazed at the amount of food carried away from tables. It appears to me that Americans waste a tremendous amount of food.
At the same time I understand restaurants serve large portions to attract customers, drum up new and repeat business and stay solvent. Skimpy portions mean dissatisfied customers who are not likely to return. What is about us that we will leave food on our plate and have it thrown in the garbage rather than settle up front for a smaller serving?
Perhaps your own experiences are similar. Perhaps not. Food is a subject too often taken for granted in America because we have so much of it. Should we look at it differently? I would like to hear your views.
E-mail me at arch@archibald99.com or comment on this blog.
Saturday, September 22
How did she know
Every since I hooked onto the internet eons ago my e-mail inbox has received SPAM messages touting alleged sex enhancement products. Lately they come with an opening line to wit: "My wife complained my Johnson was too small. Look at what I did." I don't do much looking but instead send back queries along the lines of, "How did she know? Who was she comparing you with?"
Sunday, June 24
Oceans 13
It is Sunday morning. I have taken my exercise walk. It is humid this morning and the real feel temperature will be 105 around noontime. On my walk I thought about last night and I am embarrassed that a man of my age would fall for the latest hype, glitz and glamour of Hollywood. I went to see "Oceans 13," the Clooney, Pitt, Damon, etc. sequel to the sequel. What a farce. What a waste. Better I stayed home and washed my socks. (That's a question the CIA asks applicants: would you rather go to a party or stay home and wash your socks?) No one in the film ever breaks a sweat. Geppetto, of Pinochhio fame, could have made wooden dummies for this film. Al Pacino is the bad guy, Willie Bank. He screwed a friend of the Danny Oceans' (Clooney) gang. There is something about men who "shook Sinatra's hand" are not supposed to screw each other. What passes for action is a bunch of guys sitting and standing around talking about taking "revenge" on Pacino (who in any other crime scenario would have shot the lot of them.) Julia Roberts (congratulations on the new baby) is to be admired for having the good sense to stay out of this "Oceans" film. She was in the two earlier films. Ellen Barkin, a one-time sex pot in films and on TV, sadly comes across as a post menopausal broad with large mammilla and she gets turned on because Matt Damon has some scent around his neck. It is hard to believe Barkin and Damon (think mother and son) in a sex scene. The music is good, "Lara's Theme" is part of it. The best, however, is the ending when we hear Sinatra sing "This Town."
Tuesday, June 19
Patriotism and getting the message across
Two lawyers for the ACLU, Steven Watt and Ben Wizner, write in a letter in The Wall Street Journal (June 19, 2007, pg A15) that "defending human rights...is not an act of disloyalty in a nation committed to the rule of law" and that recent Supreme Court decisions squarely repudiate the government's position in three 'war on terror' cases. These are not cases involving mere legal technicalities but violations of American core values, according to the writers.
Americans are pre-occupied with salesmanship. Case in point. Gen. David Petraeus, the Army's top man in Iraq, says that sending military officers to civilian universities for Ph.D study opens their mind to four or five sides of an argument. A retired Lt. Colonel says anything beyond a Masters degree risks hurting an officer's battlefield judgement. He says such training led another Lt. Colonel to leave out of a counterinsurgency manual what he felt was an effective tactic: strapping dead insurgents to the front of tanks for locals to see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)