Maybe I'm dating myself by acknowledging I have been a regular listener to WGN Radio for many years. The truth is, when at my desk, the station was on for long stretches of the day. Radio helps me concentrate. Sometimes, talk radio serves as white noise, sometimes I find I'm drawn into the interviews and discussions. However, lately, many of the WGN on-air personalities rely heavily on the front page of the Chicago Tribune for their topics. If I read the paper myself in the morning, I don't need WGN to read it to me again throughout the day, or to bring the writers from the paper on the air to summarize the story for me. The news is the news and I get that, but why not give me a different perspective rather than repeat someone else's?
Over the past few months, management of the station has made a number of changes that I assume are an attempt to capture a larger market share, and remain relevant. Audience favorite Spike O'Dell retired as the morning personality and was replaced with John Williams. Long-time mid-morning duo Kathy and Judy were asked to leave earlier this year. These two moves set off a parade of on-air auditions, and a series of changes at the station. John Williams was moved again, and now works from 9am-Noon. Garry Meier, who was once among the most popular (and some would say abrasive) characters on Chicago radio came out of an extended, self-imposed hiatus after failing to reach a contract agreement with his former employer. Greg Jarrett was brought in to fill the early morning slot.
Ironically, one of the few time slots that have remained stable is the one held by Steve Cochran from 4-7:00PM. In recent years, Steve has earned a reputation as the station's "bad boy." He openly questions management decisions on the air, and speaks often about how he gets hauled in the boss' office to be reprimanded for his behavior.
Here's where I come out on the changes:
I've stopped listening to WGN in the early morning. I find Jarrett's style to be pompous, arrogant, and self- absorbed. I tried to listen for a while, and was willing to overlook his constant references to California, and his West Coast contacts. I was even willing to put up with his conservative political blustering. Almost from day one, he tried to ingratiate himself to the audience by rooting for Chicago's teams, and acting tuned into politics, and the culture. It struck me as completely insincere, since he has virtually no history with the city, or knowledge on any of those topics. Admittedly, the station runs Cubs and Blackhawks games, so he had an obligation to get on those bandwagons, but the rest of the time he's trying so hard to appear "with it" and "someone I should want to know," he reminds me of the high school misfit who follows the cool crowd around campus and jumps into every conversation with a "me too" story in the hopes he'll be liked. His "commanding voice," which is great for radio, suffers from his attitude, which reminds me of that pompous dimwit character played by Ted Knight on the Mary Tyler Moore Show.
I have yet to hear Jarrett conduct an interview where he actually asks a question seeking any insight. In an attempt to show his command of a topic, he typically asks questions in the form of lengthy comments that generally allow for nothing more than a "yes" or "no" from the person being interviewed.
I always considered Andrea Darlus to be a credible news person, but it seems the station has encouraged her to be what I characterize as "bubbly and improvisational." I liked her better when she was more measured. Her new giddiness wears thin. Likewise, Leslie Keiling, the traffic reporter, has been given a wider berth to interact with Jarrett on the show. I liked her better when she just reported, and commented less. I admit, my morning alternative, WBBM is pure business radio, and I'm not crazy about it, but it beats "plastic" Jarrett and his harem.
Before leaving the topic of traffic, why do we need it every 8 minutes all day? Keiling's reports citing travel times on the local expressways is so formulaic, and changes so seldom that I can usually give it from memory. "If you're traveling inbound on the Edens, it 17 minutes to the junction . . ." Why not skip all that, and just give us deviations from the usual patterns and reports of accidents? I believe the frequent traffic and weather updates are nothing more than a device to create specific ad unit sales. I find the frequency gets in the way of meaningful interviews and discussions.
John Williams was never a favorite of mine, but I tolerated him the way you might a kind, but out-of-touch uncle at Thanksgiving dinner. Since the change to midmorning, I think he's found a second wind. He's showing more insight, asking probing questions of his guests, and is generally more entertaining than I found him to be in other day parts. The key differences between Jarrett and Williams are Williams understands no one is seeking for him to replace Walter Cronkite as the most trusted authority in America. He has learned people don't dial in to listen to him; they dial in because he is interested in what they think and have to say. Equally as significant, he doesn't take himself too seriously. Williams is a bright spot in a spotty line-up.
Garry Meier's delivery still sounds to me like his shorts are pulled up too high, but he adds an element of humor and irreverence the station can use. He's at his best when he's going after Greg Jarrett and Mayor Daley, and at his weakest when his sidekick "Elton Jim" interjects. Meier's sidekick lacks the quick thinking patter a sidekick should have. Again, I am reminded of the high school misfit who desperately wants to be part of the crowd so he constantly kisses up to the big man on campus while permitting them to also make him the brunt of most jokes, and accepts the bullying just to be part of the crowd.
Where did the station get this new "house announcer?" Is she someone's girlfriend, or Sam Zell's daughter? I can think of no other way she got on the air. I'm sure she's a terrific person, but the sound of her voice is fingernails on a chalk board to me. The first time I heard her I though it was bit someone was running. Her inflection, modulation, tone, and pace are ALL wrong. She talks too fast, places emphasis on the wrong words and syllables and is just plain annoying. I've begun keeping track of the products and services she hawks so as to remember not to buy them. Note to management: This is WGN Radio, not a Columbia School of Broadcasting class. Hearing that annoying voice frequently throughout the day is a factor in why I no longer consider myself a regular WGN listener.
Finally, realizing my comments have been mostly negative and somewhat harsh, I saved my greatest compliments for last. Steve Cochran's show is the only one I try to catch as often as possible. Again, the stations too frequent traffic and weather reports hurt his delivery, but Steve keeps his content fresher, his interviews more lively, and his topics more diverse. Steve's strength is interacting with and engaging the listeners.
Radio isn't rocket science. Just put someone on the air who is entertaining, knowledgeable on a variety of topics, and interested enough in me that I'd like to be sharing a private dinner with them.
Our beloved Brew.
R.I.P. Big guy.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Beating Chicago's Youth to Death
The local media, and as a result of the posting of a murder video on the Internet, I suspect much of the country, is abuzz about the death of another young man in Chicago. Derrion Albert was beaten with boards and kicked to death by a group of depraived fellow students. I guess the school uniforms everyone was wearing weren't as affective as school administrators hoped in keeping the peace. For the record, I have not seen, nor will I watch the video. Seeing a screen capture photo in print, splashed across the local papers, was sickening enough. That will teach the victim to refuse gang affiliation. But what will it teach others?
If you're in one of the gangs, you'll think twice about seeking a way out. If you are a young person trying to resist gangs, you realize that there really isn't any place you are safe. Derrion Albert was clubbed and kicked to death in the street, by his school. You'll also realize that the Chicago Police first responders are a little slow to step in when they are so greatly outnumbered by a blood thirsty mob. You realize that all the prayer vigils are street theater, and praying is an obscenity when subsitituted for meaningful action. All the passion and chanting about "We're taking back our communities!" and "The violence must stop!" is vulgar exhibitionism for the media. The clergy, politicians, so-called community leaders who take to the streets with bullhorns as well as the media people who cover it are supreme hypocrites. The kids already know better than to trust any of them.
What do the mothers of violence victims learn? They are as helpless as they have always told themselves they are. Next week, Derrion Albert will be replaced in the news by another murder or two and then their mothers will talk about what a good child she raised, and how she could never have imagined this happening to her baby, despite the culture of violence that is all around on a daily basis. The fathers? They threw their children away shortly after conceiving the hopeless bastards, so they belong back under the rock where they reside. What does the community learn? The beat goes on. The ministers and the newscasters have fodder for Sunday's sermon and the next talk show segment. In both case, it should help revenues.
The solution isn't more speeches, more pulpit pounding, or pleas for standing up to the violence. Men, who fathered these trouble makers, or other men from the community have to step in, using whatever means necessary, to forge one-to-one relationships with these young men. Admittedly, it won't be done with a Coke and smile. It will take extraordinary effort, using unorthodox methods.
Maybe it's too late for the current generation of animals that prey on one another. But somewhere, there is a boy and perhaps a girl who is still a step away from the gang influence and can be influenced by a caring, engaged, and fully present father figure.
That's it folks. Education, jobs, housing and all the other conditions that affect young people, lack the power of one good man in the life of a child. I've met lots of poor people, lots of underemployed, lots of uneducated, and even a couple of homeless people who who turned out to be rather remarkable people because there was a man in their life on a daily basis.
At what point do we recognize that lack of responsible fathers is the root problem? The rampant butchering of young people in the streets of Chicago is a direct result of irresponsible parenting -- women who lack character and self esteem as they crank out babies without the ability or resources to raise children, and fathers whose lost interest in the mother and the consequences of their actions the minute the sex was over. Many of these women have babies fathered by different men. Many of these men have fathered children by numerous women. As a society, we have to begin to get in the faces of men and women who inflict this reckless behavior on us.
40% of all children in Illinois live in a household with a male figure living there. 35% of ALL children born in Illinois have no father listed on their birth certificate. Who teaches young men how to be a man? Who teaches young people how men act responsibily toward women? Everytime I hear a women claim that she is both mother and father to her children I want to vomit. You may be a success as your child's mother, but you are a miserable failure at being their father. Until, and if we one day have a fully androgenous society, males and females have markedly different influences. Without their mother, or a woman of equal influence in their lives, my children would be at signficant disadvantage in the world. I can see evidence that I make an equal and entirely different impact in their lives. Every child deserves, and I would go so far as to say, requires a male and a female roll model in their life.
Same-sex relationships are the business of the participants. But suggesting that having "two mothers" or "two fathers" somehow compensates for the lack of a male and a female roll model sounds cute, but is dangerously flawed in communities as unstable as Chicago's ghetto.
Until women stop having babies they can't raise without a man, until men of the community claim young people as a personal life-long responsibility, and the community as a whole are shamed enough, the slaughter will remain constant. Doubt it? Ask yourself how long the public will express its rage over Albert's death. Then ask yourself if there is any end in sight to the slaughter in Chicago streets and elsewhere.
If you're in one of the gangs, you'll think twice about seeking a way out. If you are a young person trying to resist gangs, you realize that there really isn't any place you are safe. Derrion Albert was clubbed and kicked to death in the street, by his school. You'll also realize that the Chicago Police first responders are a little slow to step in when they are so greatly outnumbered by a blood thirsty mob. You realize that all the prayer vigils are street theater, and praying is an obscenity when subsitituted for meaningful action. All the passion and chanting about "We're taking back our communities!" and "The violence must stop!" is vulgar exhibitionism for the media. The clergy, politicians, so-called community leaders who take to the streets with bullhorns as well as the media people who cover it are supreme hypocrites. The kids already know better than to trust any of them.
What do the mothers of violence victims learn? They are as helpless as they have always told themselves they are. Next week, Derrion Albert will be replaced in the news by another murder or two and then their mothers will talk about what a good child she raised, and how she could never have imagined this happening to her baby, despite the culture of violence that is all around on a daily basis. The fathers? They threw their children away shortly after conceiving the hopeless bastards, so they belong back under the rock where they reside. What does the community learn? The beat goes on. The ministers and the newscasters have fodder for Sunday's sermon and the next talk show segment. In both case, it should help revenues.
The solution isn't more speeches, more pulpit pounding, or pleas for standing up to the violence. Men, who fathered these trouble makers, or other men from the community have to step in, using whatever means necessary, to forge one-to-one relationships with these young men. Admittedly, it won't be done with a Coke and smile. It will take extraordinary effort, using unorthodox methods.
Maybe it's too late for the current generation of animals that prey on one another. But somewhere, there is a boy and perhaps a girl who is still a step away from the gang influence and can be influenced by a caring, engaged, and fully present father figure.
That's it folks. Education, jobs, housing and all the other conditions that affect young people, lack the power of one good man in the life of a child. I've met lots of poor people, lots of underemployed, lots of uneducated, and even a couple of homeless people who who turned out to be rather remarkable people because there was a man in their life on a daily basis.
At what point do we recognize that lack of responsible fathers is the root problem? The rampant butchering of young people in the streets of Chicago is a direct result of irresponsible parenting -- women who lack character and self esteem as they crank out babies without the ability or resources to raise children, and fathers whose lost interest in the mother and the consequences of their actions the minute the sex was over. Many of these women have babies fathered by different men. Many of these men have fathered children by numerous women. As a society, we have to begin to get in the faces of men and women who inflict this reckless behavior on us.
40% of all children in Illinois live in a household with a male figure living there. 35% of ALL children born in Illinois have no father listed on their birth certificate. Who teaches young men how to be a man? Who teaches young people how men act responsibily toward women? Everytime I hear a women claim that she is both mother and father to her children I want to vomit. You may be a success as your child's mother, but you are a miserable failure at being their father. Until, and if we one day have a fully androgenous society, males and females have markedly different influences. Without their mother, or a woman of equal influence in their lives, my children would be at signficant disadvantage in the world. I can see evidence that I make an equal and entirely different impact in their lives. Every child deserves, and I would go so far as to say, requires a male and a female roll model in their life.
Same-sex relationships are the business of the participants. But suggesting that having "two mothers" or "two fathers" somehow compensates for the lack of a male and a female roll model sounds cute, but is dangerously flawed in communities as unstable as Chicago's ghetto.
Until women stop having babies they can't raise without a man, until men of the community claim young people as a personal life-long responsibility, and the community as a whole are shamed enough, the slaughter will remain constant. Doubt it? Ask yourself how long the public will express its rage over Albert's death. Then ask yourself if there is any end in sight to the slaughter in Chicago streets and elsewhere.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
5-Hour Energy
It isn't often that I see an add I admire, but 5-Hour Energy has one. How refreshing to see an ad that skips the hype, the breathless announcer, phoney actor portrayed situations, to give us straight talk. This ad tells me what's in the product (all natural ingedients, even using a mug to depict the amount of caffinne in one bottle, which they claim is equal to a cup of coffee), and what's not in the product.
I love the fact that they urge you to try a half bottle of the product, to see how it affects you, and urge you to decide then, if the product is right for you.
I am not presenting this post as an endorsement of the product. However, I can say I used 5-Hour Energy, pretty much the way the maker suggested. Last winter, I was outside Dayton, Ohio conducting a client workshop on brand strategy. Because the client wanted to conserve time for their people, we consolidated two days of content into one long day. The session started at 7:30 am and wrapped up around 6:15 PM. I was on my feet and presenting/facilitating almost without stop for the entire time. At the end of the session, I was exhausted. I still faced a more than four-hour drive back home to get a few hours sleep before rising again at 4:00 am to catch an early flight out of O'Hare to be with another client. Even with the time zone benefit of picking up and hour, I didn't have much time to rest.
Winter darkness had descended and snow started to fall as I got to the parking lot. Although I'd never tried the product before, I decided to see if 5-Hour Energy really worked. Wanting to be extra careful, and not being a regular coffee drinker, I chose to take a sip that amounted to a little less than half the bottle. Within the first hour of the drive, the snow was coming fast and furious. But I found I was feeling refreshed and alert. I wasn't experiencing the "buzz" I was expecting from the caffeine -- just a natural sharpness. I didn't even need another sip.
Despite a pretty awful winter storm, my little five-speed sports car held the road well, and I got home safe and sound. I went straight to bed and found I had no trouble getting right to sleep. I awoke fairly exhausted, but on time, to learn the storm, which dropped over a foot of snow on Indiana, had subsided. Illinois (and O'Hare) were untouched by the storm so my flight got out on time, with me aboard.
It's important that I remain on top of my game when conducting workshops, speaking engagements, and facilitating events for clients. I can't afford to be distracted, or even slightly out of sorts. If 5-Hour Energy had even the slightest negative effect on me, that would have been the first and last time I used it. Now, I carry a bottle of 5-Hour Energy with me to all my speaking engagements, presentations, and workshops. In the past eight months, I have used it one other time in the middle of a two-day seminar that called for me to do two ten-hour sessions. Again, I took a small sip, and felt no side effects.
I tell you of my personal experience not to promote the product, but rather to reinforce the manufacturer's decision to encourage people to learn what they are taking, and to take it with caution so they can gauge their own tolerance and the usefulness of the product.
Responsible advertising works. I applaud the makers of 5-Hour Energy for taking such a responsible approach and avoiding the current trend in advertising to over promise, be overly clever, or go for some quirky gimmick to attempt to attain work-of-mouth.
Remember Clara Peller and "Where's the beef?" It had everyone talking in the 80's about Wendy's ads and created a phenomenon of its own. The next pertinent questions should have been "Where's the Wendy's?" The ad campaign got the nation talking, but did little to boost sales relative to the increased ad budget, simply because Wendy's real estate strategy was to build stores in less than desirable locations. As clever as the campaign was, people weren't willing to go out of their way to find a Wendy's. At one point, JC Penny's considered acquiring Wendy's as part of its diversification strategy. The retail giant walked away after taking a look at Wendy's books, seeing the campaign created a lot of PR, but not nearly the level of sales people were claiming.
Kudos to the makers of 5-Hour Energy and the advertising people involved for having faith in their product and the ability of the buying public to decide.
I love the fact that they urge you to try a half bottle of the product, to see how it affects you, and urge you to decide then, if the product is right for you.
I am not presenting this post as an endorsement of the product. However, I can say I used 5-Hour Energy, pretty much the way the maker suggested. Last winter, I was outside Dayton, Ohio conducting a client workshop on brand strategy. Because the client wanted to conserve time for their people, we consolidated two days of content into one long day. The session started at 7:30 am and wrapped up around 6:15 PM. I was on my feet and presenting/facilitating almost without stop for the entire time. At the end of the session, I was exhausted. I still faced a more than four-hour drive back home to get a few hours sleep before rising again at 4:00 am to catch an early flight out of O'Hare to be with another client. Even with the time zone benefit of picking up and hour, I didn't have much time to rest.
Winter darkness had descended and snow started to fall as I got to the parking lot. Although I'd never tried the product before, I decided to see if 5-Hour Energy really worked. Wanting to be extra careful, and not being a regular coffee drinker, I chose to take a sip that amounted to a little less than half the bottle. Within the first hour of the drive, the snow was coming fast and furious. But I found I was feeling refreshed and alert. I wasn't experiencing the "buzz" I was expecting from the caffeine -- just a natural sharpness. I didn't even need another sip.
Despite a pretty awful winter storm, my little five-speed sports car held the road well, and I got home safe and sound. I went straight to bed and found I had no trouble getting right to sleep. I awoke fairly exhausted, but on time, to learn the storm, which dropped over a foot of snow on Indiana, had subsided. Illinois (and O'Hare) were untouched by the storm so my flight got out on time, with me aboard.
It's important that I remain on top of my game when conducting workshops, speaking engagements, and facilitating events for clients. I can't afford to be distracted, or even slightly out of sorts. If 5-Hour Energy had even the slightest negative effect on me, that would have been the first and last time I used it. Now, I carry a bottle of 5-Hour Energy with me to all my speaking engagements, presentations, and workshops. In the past eight months, I have used it one other time in the middle of a two-day seminar that called for me to do two ten-hour sessions. Again, I took a small sip, and felt no side effects.
I tell you of my personal experience not to promote the product, but rather to reinforce the manufacturer's decision to encourage people to learn what they are taking, and to take it with caution so they can gauge their own tolerance and the usefulness of the product.
Responsible advertising works. I applaud the makers of 5-Hour Energy for taking such a responsible approach and avoiding the current trend in advertising to over promise, be overly clever, or go for some quirky gimmick to attempt to attain work-of-mouth.
Remember Clara Peller and "Where's the beef?" It had everyone talking in the 80's about Wendy's ads and created a phenomenon of its own. The next pertinent questions should have been "Where's the Wendy's?" The ad campaign got the nation talking, but did little to boost sales relative to the increased ad budget, simply because Wendy's real estate strategy was to build stores in less than desirable locations. As clever as the campaign was, people weren't willing to go out of their way to find a Wendy's. At one point, JC Penny's considered acquiring Wendy's as part of its diversification strategy. The retail giant walked away after taking a look at Wendy's books, seeing the campaign created a lot of PR, but not nearly the level of sales people were claiming.
Kudos to the makers of 5-Hour Energy and the advertising people involved for having faith in their product and the ability of the buying public to decide.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Taking My Daughter to College
We spent a couple of glorious days together moving Kailey into her dorm room at Indiana University. Even after moving in bags and bags of clothing, half the possessions in her overcrowded bedroom at home, a variety of new appliances, and an assortment of decorator items, we found we'd overlooked a few things (a toothbrush, personal hygiene items, drinking cups/glasses, extension cords/surge protectors, coaxial cable, etc) and had to make trips to the local hardware store, and Target. But we didn't forget to pack essentials like a week's supply of microwavable macaroni and cheese, the microwave itself, a new HD TV, too many pairs of shoes to wear in a month of Sundays, at least a dozen headbands, and a full array of Audrey Hepburn wall posters. You get the idea -- an 18 year-old did all her own packing.
We had a ball unpacking, assembling, sorting, storing, and moving things around. Adding to the excitement was dinner with the family of her childhood best friend who I haven't seen in a long time, and were there themselves moving into another dorm on campus.
With Kailey's move complete, parting was tense and difficult. Although this wasn't the first time she's been away from home, it certainly felt like the most permanent. My little girl is going out into the world to make her own way. This wasn't as scary as sending her to intern in Washington, DC by herself as we did earlier this summer, but it was every bit as emotional for both of us. I suspect it was hardest for Mom who stayed behind to see that Tate got off to his high school classes and tend to the dogs.
Although we shared a long hug, and "I Love Yous,"neither of us was eager to look the other in the eye because we both knew we'd start crying. After I went for the door and she hurried back to the elevator, I forced myself to call out to her again. I wanted to be sure I looked her in the eye so she could see the love that will always be there for her. And as we have done countless times, I whispered "love you more, love you most."
Although no one would be the wiser if I didn't reveal this, I got slightly off route two times during the ride home. I was still struggling with the shell-shock of letting go and traveling in a bit of an emotional fog.
When I got home, everyone else was out. So after getting the car somewhat back to normal, and unpacking my suitcase, I took a shower. The glass enclosure was foggy, I couldn't see well because my glasses were off, and all of sudden I heard that sweet, familiar voice say "Hi, Daddy!" as she bounded into the bathroom.
At once, my heart soared! My little girl was home! What a pleasant and unexpected surprise! For that brief second, I wasn't even concerned about the logic of it all, or the fact that I had left Kailey 250 miles away just hours earlier. I didn't care how or why she was home, I was just thrilled to have her back! I had never noticed before how similar mother and daughter's voices are. Sandy, my wife, had come home from errands and it was she that was welcoming me. As pleased as I was to see her after a couple of days apart, I felt again like crying when the realization hit me that my sweet child is far away, and life as I have known and treasured it most, with both children under foot, is forever changed. Change is good. Life goes on. But dad is still a little sad.
We had a ball unpacking, assembling, sorting, storing, and moving things around. Adding to the excitement was dinner with the family of her childhood best friend who I haven't seen in a long time, and were there themselves moving into another dorm on campus.
With Kailey's move complete, parting was tense and difficult. Although this wasn't the first time she's been away from home, it certainly felt like the most permanent. My little girl is going out into the world to make her own way. This wasn't as scary as sending her to intern in Washington, DC by herself as we did earlier this summer, but it was every bit as emotional for both of us. I suspect it was hardest for Mom who stayed behind to see that Tate got off to his high school classes and tend to the dogs.
Although we shared a long hug, and "I Love Yous,"neither of us was eager to look the other in the eye because we both knew we'd start crying. After I went for the door and she hurried back to the elevator, I forced myself to call out to her again. I wanted to be sure I looked her in the eye so she could see the love that will always be there for her. And as we have done countless times, I whispered "love you more, love you most."
Although no one would be the wiser if I didn't reveal this, I got slightly off route two times during the ride home. I was still struggling with the shell-shock of letting go and traveling in a bit of an emotional fog.
When I got home, everyone else was out. So after getting the car somewhat back to normal, and unpacking my suitcase, I took a shower. The glass enclosure was foggy, I couldn't see well because my glasses were off, and all of sudden I heard that sweet, familiar voice say "Hi, Daddy!" as she bounded into the bathroom.
At once, my heart soared! My little girl was home! What a pleasant and unexpected surprise! For that brief second, I wasn't even concerned about the logic of it all, or the fact that I had left Kailey 250 miles away just hours earlier. I didn't care how or why she was home, I was just thrilled to have her back! I had never noticed before how similar mother and daughter's voices are. Sandy, my wife, had come home from errands and it was she that was welcoming me. As pleased as I was to see her after a couple of days apart, I felt again like crying when the realization hit me that my sweet child is far away, and life as I have known and treasured it most, with both children under foot, is forever changed. Change is good. Life goes on. But dad is still a little sad.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Christopher Sullivan makes even ugly MLS soccer seem intelligent
Loath as I am to watch MLS soccer, it is my habit to check out whatever is on Fox Soccer Channel at all hours of my viewing day. I happened on a game between DC United and Houston Dynamo last week while flipping channels and I had my finger on the channel changer just as I heard Christopher Sullivan's voice doing the color commentary. The game was a dreadful affair lacking skill, creativity, and style from either side. And yet, I stayed with it because I love the unique perspective Sullivan, a former professional player, and member of the US National Team brings to his commentary.
I've heard other former (and some active) players who lack the polish and perspective I think Sullivan brings. His delivery is measured, understated, and at times, melodic. Because of some questionable audio work during the broadcast, the commentators were often drowned out by the stadium announcer and the crowd. I actually found myself straining to hear what Sullivan had to say. Let me tell you, with all to few exceptions, that has not been the case with other soccer announcers in this country. Honestly, if I know a game is also being broadcast in Spanish, I prefer to tune that channel even though I don't speak the language simply because most English speaking announcers tend to be more distracting than contributing. Sullivan reports what he sees in a cadence that lends a rhythm to the game without distracting the viewer. Rather than just report the game, he brings you into its unique character. Too many other former players try to provide a player's perspective, but merely report the run of play.
Sullivan is an astute student of the game. His analysis blends team tactics, individual tactics, and a coach's sideline perspective. He has an amazing command of soccer history, players around the globe, and the fine points that comprise each player's game. Like the sport itself when it is played well, he keeps his commentary fluid, concise, relevant and insightful. He knows how to assess a team's game plan quickly, and at times, his ability to predict what a team is trying to do and when it will happen is uncanny.
I think a key to his success is he doesn't watch the game the way many fans and coaches in this country do. The norm is "ball watching," focus on offensive build up, or one's own team's execution. Coaches and knowledgeable fans watch three parallel aspects of the game at once: our own team's execution of the game plan, the individual and collective execution of what we believe to be the opponent's game plan, and the combined overall dynamics of the game with emphasis on individual match-ups that offer opportunistic advantages. In some cases, it is clear to me, coaches are so busy watching their own team's performance, they can't even tell you the sequence of events or key factors in an opponent's attack. This is especially true at the high school and college level, but I believe Bob Bradley, coach of the US National Team suffers from this at times as well. He's earned the nickname, "Bunker Bob" for a reason. As an aside, I was watching a game being coached by a protege' of mine, and at half time she passed by on the way back to her bench and asked if I had any observations. I took the occasion to ask her if she was aware that all three first half goals were scored on exactly the same play by two players who alternated positions, assists and goal scoring? It was clear to me that they saw a weakness and deliberately, repeatedly exploited it. It was equally clear that the coach and her defense hadn't adjusted to pick up the play after the first or second goal. I was very proud of her that she adjusted, and each time the opponent tried it after the break, it failed. Her team pretty much shut down the opponent altogether through her astute adjustments throughout the second half.
But back to Sullivan -- he has such a thinking man's soccer mind. He would make a formidable coach. If you caught the telecast of the Marathon (Honduras) and DC United game this evening you saw exactly what I am referring to in his ability to predict what Marathon needed to do to gain the advantage over DC United. As the game progressed he accurately predicted where the American team would be most vulnerable. Unfortuntely for the right back and central defenders who had a hellish night for DC United, Sullivan was laser accurate. Again, this game was a dull and lifeless affair, as evidenced by the meager crowd in attendance, until the Marathon coach took exactly the steps Sullivan had been suggesting early in the second half. A generally sloppy and unispired game was made almost bearable by Sullivan's analysis.
I know there are people who dislike Sullivan's work because of his European influences, or sometimes quirky pharsing, but rather enjoy those trademark aspects. There are very few people with whom I like to sit and watch a game because I prefer to analyze the play in my head rather than socialize and speculate as is done at most American sporting events. However, Sullivan is one person I'd love to sit with and compare observations during a match.
I've heard other former (and some active) players who lack the polish and perspective I think Sullivan brings. His delivery is measured, understated, and at times, melodic. Because of some questionable audio work during the broadcast, the commentators were often drowned out by the stadium announcer and the crowd. I actually found myself straining to hear what Sullivan had to say. Let me tell you, with all to few exceptions, that has not been the case with other soccer announcers in this country. Honestly, if I know a game is also being broadcast in Spanish, I prefer to tune that channel even though I don't speak the language simply because most English speaking announcers tend to be more distracting than contributing. Sullivan reports what he sees in a cadence that lends a rhythm to the game without distracting the viewer. Rather than just report the game, he brings you into its unique character. Too many other former players try to provide a player's perspective, but merely report the run of play.
Sullivan is an astute student of the game. His analysis blends team tactics, individual tactics, and a coach's sideline perspective. He has an amazing command of soccer history, players around the globe, and the fine points that comprise each player's game. Like the sport itself when it is played well, he keeps his commentary fluid, concise, relevant and insightful. He knows how to assess a team's game plan quickly, and at times, his ability to predict what a team is trying to do and when it will happen is uncanny.
I think a key to his success is he doesn't watch the game the way many fans and coaches in this country do. The norm is "ball watching," focus on offensive build up, or one's own team's execution. Coaches and knowledgeable fans watch three parallel aspects of the game at once: our own team's execution of the game plan, the individual and collective execution of what we believe to be the opponent's game plan, and the combined overall dynamics of the game with emphasis on individual match-ups that offer opportunistic advantages. In some cases, it is clear to me, coaches are so busy watching their own team's performance, they can't even tell you the sequence of events or key factors in an opponent's attack. This is especially true at the high school and college level, but I believe Bob Bradley, coach of the US National Team suffers from this at times as well. He's earned the nickname, "Bunker Bob" for a reason. As an aside, I was watching a game being coached by a protege' of mine, and at half time she passed by on the way back to her bench and asked if I had any observations. I took the occasion to ask her if she was aware that all three first half goals were scored on exactly the same play by two players who alternated positions, assists and goal scoring? It was clear to me that they saw a weakness and deliberately, repeatedly exploited it. It was equally clear that the coach and her defense hadn't adjusted to pick up the play after the first or second goal. I was very proud of her that she adjusted, and each time the opponent tried it after the break, it failed. Her team pretty much shut down the opponent altogether through her astute adjustments throughout the second half.
But back to Sullivan -- he has such a thinking man's soccer mind. He would make a formidable coach. If you caught the telecast of the Marathon (Honduras) and DC United game this evening you saw exactly what I am referring to in his ability to predict what Marathon needed to do to gain the advantage over DC United. As the game progressed he accurately predicted where the American team would be most vulnerable. Unfortuntely for the right back and central defenders who had a hellish night for DC United, Sullivan was laser accurate. Again, this game was a dull and lifeless affair, as evidenced by the meager crowd in attendance, until the Marathon coach took exactly the steps Sullivan had been suggesting early in the second half. A generally sloppy and unispired game was made almost bearable by Sullivan's analysis.
I know there are people who dislike Sullivan's work because of his European influences, or sometimes quirky pharsing, but rather enjoy those trademark aspects. There are very few people with whom I like to sit and watch a game because I prefer to analyze the play in my head rather than socialize and speculate as is done at most American sporting events. However, Sullivan is one person I'd love to sit with and compare observations during a match.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
The Next True American Revolution
Watching the healthcare debacle that is playing out in this country embarrasses me as an American. If the rest of the world wasn't convinced before that this nation has lost its greatness, this episode may complete the picture. America is more divided today than any other time in its history other than the Civil War. Healthcare is just the latest example.
Lies and distortions are flying from both sides. Politicians desperate to protect their personal interests dance the dance of the insincere. Big Pharma, the Insurance Industry, and healthcare providers have both sides of the aisle in Washington right where they want them -- in their back pockets.
No meaningful reform will come as a result of the political "two-stepping" being done by all parties. The Democrats will claim victory if anything makes it to the President's desk for his signature regardless of how meager the change. Republicans will claim they saved the nation, future generations, and your grandmother from being snuffed out by government agents while she slept in the nursing home, if they can deny the Democrats in the slightest way. From what I've read of the actual legislation, it isn't the profound improvement some people claim, nor is it the evil face of Socialism some of the far right suggest. Frankly, much of if it is bureaucratic, bean counting and vanilla.
In the end, both sides are more interested in the 2010 election cycle than advancing the country. As such, Big Pharma, Insurance and the hospital/medical community needed only to disrupt and delay to get what what they want - to maintain the "status quo" as much as possible. Significant, and controversial legislation has a little chance of passage after January 1. The campaign season will take precedence with no candidate wanting to risk their neck being caught on the wrong side of a vote. So after the first of the year, all parties agree to "play nice" and keep hot topics in limbo until after November. Yet another reason, the entire election process in this country needs to be revamped. We'll wait eleven months for anything of value on any topic to happen. Elections, and the money tied to them, not public service, now command every heartbeat of elected officials.
History would tell us, that with notable exceptions like Germany in World War II, revolution is usually instigated by the "have nots." Given the climate in this country, I expect it will be the conservative middle to upper class that will seek to fight to protect what they consider theirs, in less than the peaceful terms we as a nation like to pretend to be our way of handling domestic disputes in these enlightened times.
At some point in my life, I anticipate I will witness a real, bloody revolution, in the form of a civil war in this country. Maybe that's not all bad. Maybe that's what every good democracy needs from time to time to clean out the cobwebs, and earn its freedom. We are certainly proving that under the veil of peaceful discourse, corruption, self-interest and profiteering have the upper hand. The foreign enemies of America who would like to see us destroyed may need not try to disrupt our way of life. Coupled with an unstable economy that is far from correcting itself, as some "wishers upon a star" would have you believe, left to our own devices, we appear to be doing it to ourselves.
Lies and distortions are flying from both sides. Politicians desperate to protect their personal interests dance the dance of the insincere. Big Pharma, the Insurance Industry, and healthcare providers have both sides of the aisle in Washington right where they want them -- in their back pockets.
No meaningful reform will come as a result of the political "two-stepping" being done by all parties. The Democrats will claim victory if anything makes it to the President's desk for his signature regardless of how meager the change. Republicans will claim they saved the nation, future generations, and your grandmother from being snuffed out by government agents while she slept in the nursing home, if they can deny the Democrats in the slightest way. From what I've read of the actual legislation, it isn't the profound improvement some people claim, nor is it the evil face of Socialism some of the far right suggest. Frankly, much of if it is bureaucratic, bean counting and vanilla.
In the end, both sides are more interested in the 2010 election cycle than advancing the country. As such, Big Pharma, Insurance and the hospital/medical community needed only to disrupt and delay to get what what they want - to maintain the "status quo" as much as possible. Significant, and controversial legislation has a little chance of passage after January 1. The campaign season will take precedence with no candidate wanting to risk their neck being caught on the wrong side of a vote. So after the first of the year, all parties agree to "play nice" and keep hot topics in limbo until after November. Yet another reason, the entire election process in this country needs to be revamped. We'll wait eleven months for anything of value on any topic to happen. Elections, and the money tied to them, not public service, now command every heartbeat of elected officials.
History would tell us, that with notable exceptions like Germany in World War II, revolution is usually instigated by the "have nots." Given the climate in this country, I expect it will be the conservative middle to upper class that will seek to fight to protect what they consider theirs, in less than the peaceful terms we as a nation like to pretend to be our way of handling domestic disputes in these enlightened times.
At some point in my life, I anticipate I will witness a real, bloody revolution, in the form of a civil war in this country. Maybe that's not all bad. Maybe that's what every good democracy needs from time to time to clean out the cobwebs, and earn its freedom. We are certainly proving that under the veil of peaceful discourse, corruption, self-interest and profiteering have the upper hand. The foreign enemies of America who would like to see us destroyed may need not try to disrupt our way of life. Coupled with an unstable economy that is far from correcting itself, as some "wishers upon a star" would have you believe, left to our own devices, we appear to be doing it to ourselves.
Today, the real soccer season begins.
The English Premier League (EPL) starts. YIPPIE! Coupled with Series A (the Italian League) and a little assist from Tivo that means I can watch worldclass soccer all day, everyday from now through next summer (the World Cup Finals in Sout Africa). My dance card is complete.
Monday, July 27, 2009
The Most Astonishing Month in US Soccer History.
Since you are reading this, I'll assume you are not media challenged, and have regular access to news sources. Ergo, it seems safe to assume you may have seen a rash of publicity about various soccer contests, or perhaps you are among the hundreds of thousands of spectators who attended international or national team games in the US this month, or pehaps you are among the millions in this country who witnessed these contests on television.
Most of this soccer enthusiasm is a result of two tournaments happening almost simultaneously around the country -- The CONCACAF Gold Cup, a regional title of little significance (not to be confused with CONCACAF World Cup Qualifying), and the World Football Challenge (WFC).
CONCACAF is an acronym for the region of North and Central America nations as designated by soccer's international governing body (FIFA). The World Football Challenge is an inflated title given to a "friendly"tournament among four prominent foreign teams touring the US as part of their preseason schedules.
As a tune-up to the WFC, Chelsea FC played a friendly on July 18 against the Major League Soccer (MLS) expansion team Seattle Sounders in front of more than 65,000 spectators. In addition, Chelsea FC who won the WFC played four matches before a combined attendance of 275,000 people ( an average of 68,700).
When playing each other, the remaining WFC participants: Club America (Mexico), AC Milan and Inter Milan (both of Italy) drew impressive numbers for their matches.
The Gold Cup showcased 12 teams playing in pool play through four groups with the winners advancing to a "knock out" round. The "knock out" round featured teams from Costa Rica, Honduras, Mexico, and the USA. Only Costa Rica used a team comprised of its best players. The US and Mexico excluded most of their best players from their rosters and fielded teams comprised of players with limited national team experience. Essentially, they competed with players trying to earn an opportunity to make the team.
Despite using largely unknown players, the semi-final games played as a double-header in Chicago, drew impressive crowds. To be clear, the reported attendance at game time for the US v. Honduras was 20,000. The second game of the evening between Costa Rica and Mexico had an announced crowd of over 55,000. While far from "near sellout" of Soldier Field as announced by the promoters, this was an impressive turnout driven largely by the huge Mexican population in Chicago and the Midwest. Note that the first game, with the host nation, drew less than half the evenings attendance.
The Gold Cup Championship game was played at Giants Stadium and sold out with over 82,000 spectators. Again, Mexico's participation was a key factor in this turnout. The outcome of the game, a 5-0 humbling of the US by Mexico, two teams usually well matched, is an indication of how lightly the US took this competition.
In the two tournaments, with four world famous club teams, playing the first games of their preseason training schedules, and a number of North and Central America nations playing less than their best players, drew very impressive numbers.
So what does this mean for soccer in this country? Hard to say.
This past week, MLS announced its attendance is down about 7% from last year, and this includes the spectacular numbers from the previously mentioned expansion team, Seattle Sounders who are averaging over 30,000 spectators per game. Take the Sounders out of the equation and MLS reported attendance is down double digits. This is especially troubling when you factor in the numerous media reports over time that MLS tends to inflate the attendance figures it reports.
MLS blames much of its decline on the economy. If that's true, some equal measure of the success of the two tournaments might also be attributable to the economy in that fewer people are taking vacations and attending these tournaments was a form of "staycations."
I suspect the tremendous numbers in attendance associated with these two tournaments is due largely to reputations of the international clubs and national teams who participated and is a trend toward visiting teams of fame, and will not translate into increased attendance for US leagues.
As an example, a week before the Seattle v. Chelsea game, the Sounders played Houston in a MLS league game that drew more than 32,000 people (about Seattle's season average). However, three days after the Chelsea game, Seattle played the same Houston team again in a U.S. Open Cup game that drew fewer than 5000 spectators.
The fledgling Women's Professional Soccer League (WPS) announces crowds somewhere in the neighborhood of 5000 spectators per match and as the season progresses, the numbers are getting worse, not better. WPS did a good job of sprinkling many of the best women players in the world and the US among its teams. It also put together a solid business plan, and works hard at forming relationships in the community. However, the caliber of play still leaves a great deal to be desired. They may be some of the best women players in the world, but they are not yet the best teams in the world.
What this says to me is, with the exception of a few superstars like David Beckham, the soccer paying public makes its decisions based on the reputation of the team, an opportunity to see foreign national team, and the anticipated caliber of play. As I was the first to predict in a national print publication, seeing David Beckham was a novelty that wore off after one or two times, and did not translate into improved attendance for anyone when he wasn't scheduled to appear.
With the proliferation of national and international competitions coming to this country, and the ever increasing television coverage of games from the overseas professional leagues, the US spectator is becoming more knowledgeable about the game, and more discerning. This could be a double edge sword for leagues in this country. By comparison, the US professional game in general still falls far short in terms of skill, and caliber of play of that of the best men's team in the world. Given the chance to occasionally see two world-class teams play is something Americans will pay to see, but that doesn't mean they will pay to see just anyone play.
Yes, Americans will pay to see the top six teams of England's Premiere League play from time to time, but who wants to see teams at the bottom of that table, or some second division team? If my instincts are correct, the floodgates are about to open as promoters of every stripe begin enticing foreign teams of varying skill and reputation to play in the US. The diluting of product will likely result in the abrupt end of what has started as a very promising trend. But trends do not make habits.
It is the rare opportunity and the high caliber of play that combine to contribute to the outstanding attendance at Gold Cup and WFC games. Sustaining that precise balance is the key to continued success, but even then, I do not see it translating into packed stadiums for US leagues. In those rare cases when powerhouse teams like those in the WFC, and others such as Barcelona FC, Real Madrid, Manchester United, Bayern Munich, et al, are involved, the crowds will come out. In other words, don't confuse passion for great soccer with passion for any soccer.
Most of this soccer enthusiasm is a result of two tournaments happening almost simultaneously around the country -- The CONCACAF Gold Cup, a regional title of little significance (not to be confused with CONCACAF World Cup Qualifying), and the World Football Challenge (WFC).
CONCACAF is an acronym for the region of North and Central America nations as designated by soccer's international governing body (FIFA). The World Football Challenge is an inflated title given to a "friendly"tournament among four prominent foreign teams touring the US as part of their preseason schedules.
As a tune-up to the WFC, Chelsea FC played a friendly on July 18 against the Major League Soccer (MLS) expansion team Seattle Sounders in front of more than 65,000 spectators. In addition, Chelsea FC who won the WFC played four matches before a combined attendance of 275,000 people ( an average of 68,700).
When playing each other, the remaining WFC participants: Club America (Mexico), AC Milan and Inter Milan (both of Italy) drew impressive numbers for their matches.
The Gold Cup showcased 12 teams playing in pool play through four groups with the winners advancing to a "knock out" round. The "knock out" round featured teams from Costa Rica, Honduras, Mexico, and the USA. Only Costa Rica used a team comprised of its best players. The US and Mexico excluded most of their best players from their rosters and fielded teams comprised of players with limited national team experience. Essentially, they competed with players trying to earn an opportunity to make the team.
Despite using largely unknown players, the semi-final games played as a double-header in Chicago, drew impressive crowds. To be clear, the reported attendance at game time for the US v. Honduras was 20,000. The second game of the evening between Costa Rica and Mexico had an announced crowd of over 55,000. While far from "near sellout" of Soldier Field as announced by the promoters, this was an impressive turnout driven largely by the huge Mexican population in Chicago and the Midwest. Note that the first game, with the host nation, drew less than half the evenings attendance.
The Gold Cup Championship game was played at Giants Stadium and sold out with over 82,000 spectators. Again, Mexico's participation was a key factor in this turnout. The outcome of the game, a 5-0 humbling of the US by Mexico, two teams usually well matched, is an indication of how lightly the US took this competition.
In the two tournaments, with four world famous club teams, playing the first games of their preseason training schedules, and a number of North and Central America nations playing less than their best players, drew very impressive numbers.
So what does this mean for soccer in this country? Hard to say.
This past week, MLS announced its attendance is down about 7% from last year, and this includes the spectacular numbers from the previously mentioned expansion team, Seattle Sounders who are averaging over 30,000 spectators per game. Take the Sounders out of the equation and MLS reported attendance is down double digits. This is especially troubling when you factor in the numerous media reports over time that MLS tends to inflate the attendance figures it reports.
MLS blames much of its decline on the economy. If that's true, some equal measure of the success of the two tournaments might also be attributable to the economy in that fewer people are taking vacations and attending these tournaments was a form of "staycations."
I suspect the tremendous numbers in attendance associated with these two tournaments is due largely to reputations of the international clubs and national teams who participated and is a trend toward visiting teams of fame, and will not translate into increased attendance for US leagues.
As an example, a week before the Seattle v. Chelsea game, the Sounders played Houston in a MLS league game that drew more than 32,000 people (about Seattle's season average). However, three days after the Chelsea game, Seattle played the same Houston team again in a U.S. Open Cup game that drew fewer than 5000 spectators.
The fledgling Women's Professional Soccer League (WPS) announces crowds somewhere in the neighborhood of 5000 spectators per match and as the season progresses, the numbers are getting worse, not better. WPS did a good job of sprinkling many of the best women players in the world and the US among its teams. It also put together a solid business plan, and works hard at forming relationships in the community. However, the caliber of play still leaves a great deal to be desired. They may be some of the best women players in the world, but they are not yet the best teams in the world.
What this says to me is, with the exception of a few superstars like David Beckham, the soccer paying public makes its decisions based on the reputation of the team, an opportunity to see foreign national team, and the anticipated caliber of play. As I was the first to predict in a national print publication, seeing David Beckham was a novelty that wore off after one or two times, and did not translate into improved attendance for anyone when he wasn't scheduled to appear.
With the proliferation of national and international competitions coming to this country, and the ever increasing television coverage of games from the overseas professional leagues, the US spectator is becoming more knowledgeable about the game, and more discerning. This could be a double edge sword for leagues in this country. By comparison, the US professional game in general still falls far short in terms of skill, and caliber of play of that of the best men's team in the world. Given the chance to occasionally see two world-class teams play is something Americans will pay to see, but that doesn't mean they will pay to see just anyone play.
Yes, Americans will pay to see the top six teams of England's Premiere League play from time to time, but who wants to see teams at the bottom of that table, or some second division team? If my instincts are correct, the floodgates are about to open as promoters of every stripe begin enticing foreign teams of varying skill and reputation to play in the US. The diluting of product will likely result in the abrupt end of what has started as a very promising trend. But trends do not make habits.
It is the rare opportunity and the high caliber of play that combine to contribute to the outstanding attendance at Gold Cup and WFC games. Sustaining that precise balance is the key to continued success, but even then, I do not see it translating into packed stadiums for US leagues. In those rare cases when powerhouse teams like those in the WFC, and others such as Barcelona FC, Real Madrid, Manchester United, Bayern Munich, et al, are involved, the crowds will come out. In other words, don't confuse passion for great soccer with passion for any soccer.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Quiznos
I stopped in our neighborhood Quiznos for the first time in many months. I noticed three things:
1. Their Torpedo product is essentially half the width of their previous sandwich and appears to be a total of three or four thinly sliced pieces of meat. 2. The width of their regular sandwiches has also been downsized by at least 30 %. 3. Prices have climbed by about 10% from what I remember.
A fellow operating the register, who I guessed was the franchisee was chatting with one of the food workers about all the attention the new Jimmy Johns was getting down the road. "They'll be back. Sure, everybody is checking them out, but once they realize that quantity isn't quality they'll come back." I watched the eyes of the worker and all I could read was "I wonder if JJ's is hiring?"
The handful of people in Quiznos, in the middle of the noon hour, confirmed he is feeling the competitive pressure. Just for the heck of it, I went down the street and saw the Jimmy John parking lot jammed. But out of curiosity, I went a block further to the Subway and found their parking lot as full, and the line of customers waiting to be served as they usually are. Directly across the street from JJ's is a Taco Bell that completed a major remodeling within the month. Looks like a brand new place. Some of the other adjacent fast food places were spruced up, with newly stripped parking lots, extra clean windows and fresh landscaping.
The Jimmy Johns has a prime location in the middle of "fast food" row, right next to McDonald's. Subway is just a short distance further past McDonald's. Quiznos is in the opposite direction from the major intersection, sits back from the road somewhat obscured by a bank that sits closer to the road, in a strip mall of "mom and pop" retailers. Although it has been in this location for more than a year, I give it less than a year before it goes under. Downsized product + rising prices + robust competition = poorer value. Note to Quiznos: location, location, location. Can't wait till Monday when I get to try Jimmy Johns for lunch.
1. Their Torpedo product is essentially half the width of their previous sandwich and appears to be a total of three or four thinly sliced pieces of meat. 2. The width of their regular sandwiches has also been downsized by at least 30 %. 3. Prices have climbed by about 10% from what I remember.
A fellow operating the register, who I guessed was the franchisee was chatting with one of the food workers about all the attention the new Jimmy Johns was getting down the road. "They'll be back. Sure, everybody is checking them out, but once they realize that quantity isn't quality they'll come back." I watched the eyes of the worker and all I could read was "I wonder if JJ's is hiring?"
The handful of people in Quiznos, in the middle of the noon hour, confirmed he is feeling the competitive pressure. Just for the heck of it, I went down the street and saw the Jimmy John parking lot jammed. But out of curiosity, I went a block further to the Subway and found their parking lot as full, and the line of customers waiting to be served as they usually are. Directly across the street from JJ's is a Taco Bell that completed a major remodeling within the month. Looks like a brand new place. Some of the other adjacent fast food places were spruced up, with newly stripped parking lots, extra clean windows and fresh landscaping.
The Jimmy Johns has a prime location in the middle of "fast food" row, right next to McDonald's. Subway is just a short distance further past McDonald's. Quiznos is in the opposite direction from the major intersection, sits back from the road somewhat obscured by a bank that sits closer to the road, in a strip mall of "mom and pop" retailers. Although it has been in this location for more than a year, I give it less than a year before it goes under. Downsized product + rising prices + robust competition = poorer value. Note to Quiznos: location, location, location. Can't wait till Monday when I get to try Jimmy Johns for lunch.
Starbucks update
I posted the previous blog yesterday. Today, I read that Starbucks is testing a new concept in one of their stores by not using the Starbucks name. I may not have this name exactly correct, but it's something 5th St. Coffee and Tea. The point is, they are playing with their concept. I find it amazing that the Starbucks brand has never talked about coffee. In fact, their positioning has always focused on being a person's third destination (1.Home 2. work/school 3. Starbucks) which would position them ahead of Church and play as dedicated destinations. It will be fun to see how this plays out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)