NorthSideSox72

Found this interesting...

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 28, 2010 -> 12:13 PM) yeah, bond funds. I'll take a look at OH. I'd never even heard of it before. They started as a niche site targeted towards equity option trading, but then expanded out to catch the general equity crowd (i.e. you). To do that, they added a bunch of tools and dropped their fees to very, very low levels. You can take advantage of that potentially.

I've never had the Allagash White, I might have to try that. Haven't had the Sam Adams Cherry Wheat either, but don't plan to. I've never had a fruit beer or lambic that I actually liked. QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 28, 2010 -> 10:48 AM) Here's a hint from the top 10-15: ugh.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Dec 28, 2010 -> 10:42 AM) I opened an account with Optionshouse over the summer, as a beginner I have no problem with it, especially the $2.95 fees which are really low. They don't have an Iphone app or anything but I don't mind since I don't have a smart phone anyways. OH is a great choice for stocks, ETF's and options. They are also getting to be good at mutual funds. But for JIMB, if he wants to direct invest in bonds, OH isn't a good choice. Jenks, are you talking about actually buying bonds, or buying bond funds? If you are just doing funds, then OptionsHouse may be the best choice around. Also by the way, OH does have a mobile site, which plays with basically any mobile OS. Its not a Market-buy app, its just a version of the website that is written to work well in mobile browsers.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Dec 28, 2010 -> 09:08 AM) Smithwicks is good. Apparently a true black and tan is made with Smithwicks and Guinness...probably because they're both brewed by the same company. I've had black and tans made with Harp, Bass, and Smithwicks, and I'll say that it is pretty damn good with the Smithwicks. There are so many beers out there, and you can find pretty good selections at places like Binny's. But, it amazes me how many there are that I've never heard of. I've reviewed almost 400 beers at Rate Beer, and there are people on there that have reviewed over 5000. 5000 different beers? Wow. My understanding is that a Black & Tan is still the same Guiness and Bass, but that in Ireland they typically drink a Half 7 Half which is all Irish - Guiness and Harp. I've never heard of Smithwicks being used.

QUOTE (G&T @ Dec 28, 2010 -> 08:33 AM) It worries me that as the rankings get higher, the BA ratings get lower. Gumballhead is a beer that I have wanted for years now, and it's never around when I'm in Chicago. And I feel the sudden need to give Smithwicks another shot. That history lesson intrigues me. Smithwicks and Gumball Head are definitely worth it. I haven't had the Goose Island example from the list, its seasonal and I've just never tried it. And Red Stripe is something I'd avoid. Shiner Bock is decent. I'm hoping for some more obscure stuff on the list though, that I haven't tried. Just had a Rogue Dead Guy Maibock last night, hadn't had that one before - I liked it.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 28, 2010 -> 07:57 AM) 8am we'll get the October home price index (expected to fall a bit) 20-city price index YOY down 0.8%, versus expectations of down 0.6%. Markets didn't seem to care about the difference, still showing a positive pre-open bias.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 28, 2010 -> 08:08 AM) Paying for the expensive part while getting none of the benefits of the cheap part. OK, you'll note that when I originally suggested this, that I specifically said that from a cost per plane perspective, my plan is not ideal. But you can't think of this in the exact same way you do a business that sells to customerS. This is going to one customer, and one only, who dictates the manufacturing process. So cost per unit is a lesser concern than it would otherwise be. The bigger concern is overall cash flow out, and results. In my view, the results dictate that you want two things for the air force - right sized force for least overall spending possible, but still be able to maintain a technological edge. So for that purpose, its better for the Air Force to spend $25B on 100 planes than $35B on 200 planes, if your planes are so advanced that the ONLY real values in having them are edge maintenance and replacement of planes going out of service.

After the lowest volume trading day of the year yesterday, activity should pick up a bit with some reports... Retail sales for the holiday season: the official store numbers aren't out yet, but two early indicators released yesterday (SpendingPulse and Customer Growth Partners) are saying the increases are 5.5% or 6%, either of which would be the highest since 2005 and both blow expectations out of the water. Some economic forecasters are upping their expectations for GDP in 2011. 8am we'll get the October home price index (expected to fall a bit) 9am we'll get the new consumer confidence index reading (expected to rise a bit)

QUOTE (hometeamfan @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 06:54 PM) Not true....arbitration is comparing one player to another that had similiar seasons.... Your pay is based on what youve already done. Wait, you're talking about arbitration? I thought we were discussing locking up Danks in a long term contract with the team - which is not arbitration. Those contracts are not about past performance, they are about anticipated future performance. Past performance is of course a major influence in that, but there is still an important difference there. Your statement that they should pay Danks what he deserves, if we are talking about a long term contract, is just not the way it works. If you meant arbitration, then certainly that's different.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 04:35 PM) So who exactly is going to leave a production line sit at all of these different defense companies on the off chance that we need more after the program is mothballed? Otherwise, you are starting over again. I feel like I already said this twice... No one leaves the lines sitting. You don't do that at all. You close the line and move onto the next thing. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 04:46 PM) You're half-way to the flaw in NSS's logic. If there's money available to build a line, then someone will keep it up and running. The problem is that building the lines, completing all the tests and designs, figuring out all the flaws, losing a couple test pilots, etc., is the expensive part; building the planes is the cheap part. Of that $35 billion price, probably the first $25 billion was spent setting up the system and design. Once you get the design, producing the planes becomes the cheaper part. Running the line from here they estimate costs about $100 million or so a plane, while the first hundred on average came out at about $250 million a plane. So what's the flaw then, exactly?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 04:23 PM) Exactly how long does it take to "ramp up" an F-22 building program? Just watching how long it has taken to get 787 rolling off of an assembly room floor has been a horrifying site. That was my entire point in my plan - read what I posted, and then look at the 787. The great, great majority of time and effort goes into just getting them into production. After that, its quite easy, relatively. For example, look at the extended 747's they are pumping out. That was a pretty quick turn to get those going, and that required airframe changes. If you are just going with existing design, the ramp time is miniscule compared to starting from the drawing board (literally).

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 04:09 PM) Balta, given our clear intelligence failures the last 10-15 years, how do you know this is true? How can we know for sure we not only have the best, but a generation lead, in cutting edge technology? Also, IMO the same reasoning behind your view on civil scientific research spending (every dollar spent on science is a benefit) should be applied to spending on defense technology and research. When the US is multiple generations ahead of the rest of the world in alternate energy, then we should talk about cutting that back too.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 04:03 PM) Currently, there are 187 F-22's in service according to the military, filling up only a handful of squadrons, none of which have ever been used in combat. The total cost at present of the program is about $35 billion. Then in my view, its time to kill it, file the design docs, and start a new skunk works for the next thing. Build 2 squads of those, then move on again. Repeat, unless or until the air superiority game changes significantly.

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) does that happen to have any bearing on where the state is losing population? Should it? Yes. Does it? Sort of - there are federal laws as to how redistricting can be handled. But the bulk of the decisions, within those federal parameters, fall to the states and their laws (in Illinois, its the legislature's call).

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 03:58 PM) I understand that. But we've got a couple guys by the names of Konerko and Dunn that are going to hold down 1B/DH for the next three years. So again, unless he proves otherwise, there's nowhere to play him. Not saying he's untradeable. But it's going to be hard, IMO, to get back maximum value considering the circumstances. And I'm TOTALLY against stashing him in the minors. Maybe to start the year. But unless he really struggles to begin the year, that would be irresponsible on multiple levels. Well first, a lot can change in a year or two. Morel, Dunn, Konerko, various outfielders... one or more can get injured, traded, fall apart performance-wise, etc. Second, its not like the guy was putting up stupid numbers at AAA - he's 21 (my bad earlier saying 20) and still developing, and a year at AAA to improve his plate discipline and get better defensively at something are very worthwhile. There is nothing irresponsible in giving him another year to develop, with 3 more years still under team control (or is it more?). Third, I don't think that trade value maximization is very tied to how blocked he is. Its much more heavily tied to demand by other teams. I think you are seriously overrating not only 1B versus 3B when he's got a serious bat, but I also think you are choosing an element of trade value way down the list to focus on. His prospective playing capabilities are number 1 regardless of what goes on around him, the needs of the other team are number 2. All else are distant 3rd or lower in consideration.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 03:49 PM) Actually NSS, assuming his birthdate is accurate, he turns 22 during training camp this year. I thought he was 20 during 2010 season - I guess he was 21, my bad.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 03:56 PM) I'd like to see them pursue projects like this in very small scale. Build 1 or 2 squadrons of them at most, then move onto the next project. Keep maintaining previous technologies, because as you said, they do more than fine... but still put out a small generation every so often to keep that cutting edge. Its slightly more expensive from an R&D cost spread perspective, but the overall cost is much lower, you keep your tech edge, and you maintain a force that's cheaper to run and cheaper to train on. Also should have added, this method allows you to quickly ramp up into more recent technologies if or when the need arrives, because you already have a fully designed, vetted and tested platform - just need to rebuild the assembly lines, which is relatively easy (compared to the early development and testing phases).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 03:53 PM) Aside from keeping you employed, what exactly is the F-22 useful for? It's an expensive air superiority fighter that has zero role right now in maintaining air superiority because even the best the rest of the world has can't challenge the last generation of U.S. fighters. On top of that, it's so expensive that at a shootdown rate of 15:1 enemy:us, the fighter still remains impractical; you need about 30:1 or 40:1 for the costs to even come out close to equal. I'd like to see them pursue projects like this in very small scale. Build 1 or 2 squadrons of them at most, then move onto the next project. Keep maintaining previous technologies, because as you said, they do more than fine... but still put out a small generation every so often to keep that cutting edge. Its slightly more expensive from an R&D cost spread perspective, but the overall cost is much lower, you keep your tech edge, and you maintain a force that's cheaper to run and cheaper to train on.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 03:35 PM) I'm just saying we're not exactly dealing from a position of strength when other teams know we have nowhere to play him. And I don't buy this camp Cora crap. Josh Fields called and told me it's not really that impactful. Because he wasn't signed to a 4-year deal to sit in the minors. And if he can't show that he can play a competent position, 3B or OF, his value diminishes greatly. I think the people around the league already know he's probably a 1B at this point, maybe 3B, and maybe-maybe an OF. There's no secret here - Viciedo's bat is what will get him to the majors, and teams will use him where they can. He's also only 20 (and under control for, what, 4 more yearsor something?) and the Sox would be perfectly content to wait for things to develop with him and players around him, so I don't really see much weakness in the Sox' position.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 02:24 PM) Which ultimately brings me back to the organization's mishandling or mis-judgement of younger players. Or guys that we either draft or sign. We seem to be really good at raiding other teams inventory. But horrible at the other aspect. I don't want to see Viciedo go for a struggling yet talented high A pitcher that Scott Merkin will inevitably dub Cooper's next great experiment and then reference Thornton, Floyd and Contreras. What possible reason would you have to think this has even a slight chance of happening? When has KW ever made a deal like that?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 01:53 PM) Although this statement was true 10 years ago in the middle of the needle-boom, it's no longer as true as it once was. Last year, for example, there were only 11 1b in baseball who had OPS's over .800, 8 LF's, and 9 RF's. And a lot of those guys either were really F***ing expensive or will be really F***ing expensive starting this year. On average last year, each of the 30 teams in MLB had 1 guy out of 1b, LF, and RF who put up an .800+ OPS over the full season. A lot of teams had zero guys who did. Thank you. The story with Viciedo all along is that his bat would play, and it still looks like it will. 3B was an experiment, and its a bonus if he can stick there.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 27, 2010 -> 08:24 AM) And what was with the CGI circa 2003? The CGI Jeff Bridges was so awful. At the very least they shouldn't have used it in the real world scene in the beginning of the film. It only bothered me in that real-world scene. The rest of it, the fact that it was CGI was reasonable to the "plot".

Also, saw the trailer for Cowboys vs Aliens. Absolutely must see that film. Trailers for new Pirates and Transformers 3 were shown as well, and they look disastrously bad.

Saw Tron. Keep in mind that I'm old enough I saw the original in the theater. This movie is really easy to break down into good and bad, because there was no in-between... GOOD: Visuals, set pieces, etc., all excellent. Killer sountrack too. BAD: Writing, acting, dialogue, and any attempt to add anything new to the franchise whatsoever. I'd give it a C-. Not a horrible movie, it was fun to watch. But nothing I'd spend good money on again.