Madison Who’s Who Blog

There is a rainbow looming over the stormy skies of the housing crisis. Not surprisingly, it’s a great time to be a buyer. There are signs of economic recovery, even if they be little, even if they be slow moving indicators.  It’s always a good time for happy thoughts and dreaming for the future.  So today we take on dream houses, in particular dream 2nd houses.  If you are in the market, for real, here are some places to look.  If you are not in the market have some fun walking down fantasy lane.

From BARRON’S

By STEVEN M. SEARS

10 Best Places for Second Homes

At long last, the market for luxury real estate is coming back to life.

Prices for primary residences, which plunged at least 20% from the peak in 2007, appear to have bottomed. In some of the snappiest locations, scattered bidding wars are breaking out and prices are turning upward.

In Greenwich, Conn., realty brokers say, the final months of 2009 were almost record-setters for sales volume, as two years of pent-up demand was unleashed. Even the megadeal is back. In Beverly Hills, film producer Jeffrey Katzenberg just plunked down $35 million for an 8,700-square-foot home on six acres.

There’s nothing like a stabilized economy and a huge rebound in stocks to send folks looking for the perfect manse. The return of hefty Wall Street bonuses hasn’t hurt, either.

With all that in mind, and with summer just around the corner, Barron’s sized up the market for upscale second homes, one of the greatest luxuries of all. We scoped out dozens of deluxe enclaves across the country, speaking with brokers, homeowners and others.

Prices are way down–40% off the peak in some locations. Seemingly at or near bottom, they are starting to attract the first wave of bargain hunters–and not just families in need of R&R. Hard-nosed investors also are on the prowl, says Jan Reuter, head of residential real estate at U.S. Trust Bank of America Private Wealth Management: “We’ve seen an uptick in buying in just the last couple of months.”

To help you in the hunt, Barron’s has selected the 10 best places in America for second homes. These alluring locales have it all: gorgeous houses, spectacular views, world-class golf, fishing and skiing, fine dining and great shopping. You’ll find the complete range of lifestyles, from peaceful and easy to vigorously social.

Some warnings: 1) Our selections are every bit as subjective as tastes in homes themselves. 2) The prices cited are based mainly on conversations with locals, because hard data isn’t available. 3) Your plush new retreat may take some time to rise in value. Serious appreciation will require a better economy and, quite possibly, another big rally in stocks.

But hey, you could do worse than marking time in paradise.

1. Maui: Consistently rated the “Best Island in the World” by travel experts, this Hawaiian beauty underwent a growth spurt during the past decade that some critics bemoaned as excessive. But the southern coast, anchored by the hamlet of Wailea, has weathered it all well. One of the first master-planned resort communities in the nation, it’s a balanced blend of understated gated communities, luxury resort hotels, three excellent golf courses, a tennis center and, of course, several crescent sandy beaches. Wailea has 500 single-family homes, and their views are stunning: lush, verdant hills, brilliantly blue ocean and, after the steamy sun showers, rainbows over the horizon.

Median Price: $1.5 million

Drop From Peak: 27%

Neighbor: Oprah Winfrey

2. Kiawah Island, S.C.: Languid elegance defines South Carolina’s coast, and Kiawah, just off Charleston, may be its ideal expression. The island has one developer, Kiawah Development Partners, and an architectural review board that protects the 4,500 or so properties from the excesses often seen when wealth meets water. It has 10 miles of hard-sand beaches and abundant wildlife: bobcats, gray foxes, loggerhead turtles and more. Its Ocean Course has long been favorite of golfers; it hosted the 2007 Senior PGA Championship. Want to tee up some culture? Charleston is just 45 minutes away.

Median Price: $1.4 million

Drop From Peak: 21%

Neighbor: Dan Marino

3. The Hamptons: Long the favored retreat of high-powered New Yorkers, the Hamptons are a just now experiencing a fresh jump in home sales, realty brokers say. Credit the revival in Wall Street bonuses. Southampton, bastion of old money, is known for its grand estates, but lovely homes can be found in what not long ago were potato fields. In chic East Hampton, the choicest real estate is on Georgica Pond. Alas, most of the area’s finest properties never come to market. Once you own a home in the Hamptons, you own it forever.

Median Price: $1.5 million

Drop from Peak: 30%

Neighbor: Steven Spielberg

4. Park City, Utah:  Skiers love Park City for its powdery winters, but homeowners relish the summers, too. The crowds thin out, life slows down and the tall aspens lining the nearby Wasatch range shimmer in the breeze. The one-street Old West downtown is dotted with classic Victorian houses, while Deer Valley, an understated year-round resort community, sits on the eastern edge. Its namesake ski hill has been crowned by readers of Ski Magazine as North America’s top ski resort for three years running. For $100,000, you can join the nearby Talisker Club, with links designed by PGA Tour Champion Mark O’Meara. Bonus: Salt Lake City International Airport, a Delta Air Lines hub, has direct flights to the East and West Coasts.

Median Price: $1 million

Drop From Peak: 45%

Neighbor: Robert Redford

5. Aspen, Colo.:  Aspen isn’t just a year-round playground; it’s also a cultural oasis, the home to the Aspen Institute think tank, a world-class symphony, and dance and art festivals. The four major ski hills speak for the themselves. The Maroon Creek Club includes a challenging golf course designed by Tom Fazio. The city’s West End has a mix of 19th-century Victorians and modern abodes not far from the “beachfront”–downtown neighborhoods within walking distance of the lift. The posh shopping is so good that some folks never find their way up to the trails.

Median Price: $5.6 million

Drop From Peak: 6%

Neighbor: Jack Nicholson

6. Pebble Beach, Calif.:  Golfer Jack Nicklaus once said that if he had one last round to play before he died, it would be at Pebble Beach. The site of four U.S. Opens, The Links are rated the No. 1 public course in America by Golf Digest for 2009-10. There are several other public and private golf courses within the guarded gates of the verdant Del Monte Forest, which surrounds the community of Pebble Beach. Stunning estates not far from the first tee offer sweeping views of Monterey Bay. Duffers who buy in can play the Golden Bear’s dream course every day.

Median Price: $1.1 million

Drop Since Peak: 20%

Neighbor: Clint Eastwood.

7. Palm Beach:  This Florida island hovers above reality, and at $30 million-plus, so do its finest pads. Oodles of socialites and tycoons wouldn’t have it any other way. Neither would Jimmy Buffett, Rush Limbaugh and too many other boldface names to mention. In addition to the never-ending social whirl, residents like the shopping on Worth Avenue and the beauty of Addison Mizner’s Mediterranean-style architecture. Mortals can enjoy the town by buying “over the moat”– in Jupiter, North Palm Beach, Palm Beach Gardens and Delray Beach.

Median Price: $3.5 million

Drop From Peak: 11%

Neighbor: Henry Kravis

8. Captiva/Sanibel Island, Fla.: Sitting off the coast of Fort Myers, a nerve center of America’s foreclosure crisis, the barrier islands of Captiva and Sanibel are the very picture of laid-back living. Linked by a bridge at Sanibel’s northern point, the islands are renowned for their pristine beaches and abundant seashells. Then there are the hiking trails; half the island is a nature preserve. The late Robert Rauschenberg is, even in death, one of the largest landowners. His 35-acre spread, complete with studio, is intact on Captiva’s northern end.

Median Price: $3.5 million

Drop From Peak: 40%

Neighbor: Ted Koppel

9. Asheville, N.C.:  Nestled in the mountains of North Carolina, Asheville offers a four-seasons lifestyle with just enough culture and good restaurants to keep urban-withdrawal pangs at bay. Some homebuyers come from the Northeast, and many come from Florida to beat the heat. The locals call them “halfbacks,” since Asheville is halfway up the East Coast. The town has a university and a thriving art scene. We like the 1920s-vintage Tudor homes in the Biltmore Forest district, once part of the adjacent Biltmore Estate. The funky Grove Park neighborhood is also worth a look.

Median Price: $700,000

Drop From Peak: 38%

Neighbor: Andie McDowell

10. Gasparilla Island, Fla.:  Katherine Hepburn used to rent a beach house here, and it’s easy to see why. The small island off Florida’s southwest coast has been lovingly preserved: The Gasparilla Act, a state law passed in 1980, put a tight lid on population density, building heights and commercial development. Golf carts — some customized to resemble ‘57 Chevys — are the favored mode of transportation. The historic downtown has gracious homes, and the waters around the island are renowned for tarpon fishing. To check it out, check into the plush Gasparilla Inn.

Median Price: $1.8 million.

Drop From Peak: 18%

Neighbor: Harrison Ford, frequent visitor.

…it creates a thorny puzzle for businesses striving to build online audiences.

A recent article in The Atlantic written by Derek Martin gives an informative introduction as to how the internet is changing.

“The golden age of the Web is coming to an end. Prepare for the Splinternet.”

Thus announces Josh Bernoff in an interesting post about how new gadgets designed for surfing the Web — our smartphones, e-readers, tablets and even TVs — are fighting with each other to redefine how we access information online. But what is the “Splinternet” and why should the answer even matter to you?*

Let’s take a step back and think about some of the new gadgets on the market. Smartphones and e-readers are not like laptops, where each computer lets you interact the same Web. For example, Apple iPad won’t support Flash software, which supports most online videos. Ben Kunz of BusinessWeek suggests this is a blatant move to force iPad users to satisfy all their video cravings through Apple stores. Similarly, in the e-reader arms race, Apple, Sony and Amazon are competing with different libraries of books and products.

If the last 10 years were a heyday for open content on the Web, the next ten years could be the age of platforms. Today to reach the universe of new mobile browsers, you can’t assume that your audience is using only a laptop to access the same version of your content. So it won’t be enough to have just a magazine website. Instead you’ll need a website and a Kindle App and an iPhone/iPad app and another app for another device that has a distinct audience and requires a specific template. Kunz sums up the problem for content providers like this:

The device-portal tie-up isn’t necessarily bad for consumers, who have plenty of choices for media consumption. But it creates a thorny puzzle for businesses striving to build audiences. How do you compete when your potential customers are using devices and content systems that lock one another out?

Let’s bring this back to advertising, because money is at the heart of this platform battle. The first wave of the ad war was fought on a couple fronts, dominated by display ads on content pages and search ads on search pages. Google’s great revenue revelation was that you could make a bazillion dollars selling online ads next to search results, because you’re putting ads through an obvious filter: what the user wants to find. Google has parlayed that discovery into $23 billion business. It is the success story in advertising in the last five years.

But in the Splinternet age, ads are more tightly controlled by platform. My old Blackberry defaulted to Bing search because Verizon has a deal with Mircosoft. But my new phone that runs Google Android software serves Google ads under apps for programs like Pandora. Meanwhile Apple has banned any apps that use location-based software to serve up targeted ads, presumably because it wants to corner that market on its own device. This is a new age, where gadgets have a “hidden agenda” to hold you in their ecosystem of content display and advertising. There are walls are going up just as the walls to mobile Internet access are falling down.

In an effort to showcase new ideas and innovations in marketing, Madison Who’s Who brings you this article authored by Steve Rubenstein Special to The San Francisco Chronicle.

A dozen guys were standing around a San Jose backyard the other day, gazing fondly at a naked chicken. It was a moment of some significance. It was not just about a dozen guys and a naked chicken. It was, perhaps, even historical. For man has achieved great things in the course of history, but one thing he has never achieved is the right to attend sales parties – at least not in the way that women attend sales parties – and stand around in a backyard in the company of a commission salesman and a naked chicken.

There are Tupperware parties and Mary Kay parties. Men may be legally allowed to attend such parties but they never do, because Tupperware is plastic bowls and Mary Kay is lipstick. But now, thanks to a new Minnesota company, there are sales parties for guys, with barbecue gear as the merchandise.

On hand in San Jose were a dozen guys who had been lured to this particular backyard by the promise of free beer.

“Free beer,” said salesman John Schaffran, in the hushed voice of a man imparting a great truth, “is something that will always get a crowd of guys together.”

Schaffran is a newly minted sales rep for something called Man Cave, the outfit that is hawking the barbecue equipment. He is trying very hard to prove that men can, in the company of friends and a “party” setting, fall for a catalog full of high-priced gewgaws as readily as any female of the species.

Thanks to the beer, everyone was in either a good mood or a very good mood. It was time to do a little selling. Schaffran shoved a can full of beer into the innards of the chicken and placed it on the barbecue grill. The can was no ordinary can but a special can specifically designed to be filled with beer and shoved up the business end of a naked chicken. It’s in the catalog, for $29 plus shipping.

It was only Schaffran’s second sales demonstration, so he had to do quite a bit of shoving to get the can inside the chicken. The guys stood around, watching what was happening to the chicken and offering advice in the way that guys do when trying to sound as if they know what they’re talking about.

While the chicken cooked, Schaffran tried to get folks interested in his company’s other fine and indispensable wares, which consisted of a set of rollers for cooking bratwurst ($30), a giant spatula big enough to flip four burgers at a time ($25) and a branding iron for burning the owner’s initials into a sirloin steak ($55).

The guys stood around and watched the chicken. No one was placing an order. A recession is perhaps not the best time to be selling $25 spatulas. Clearly, the first-ever barbecue sales party for men was not going the way that revolutionary events are supposed to go.

And then Schaffran got a terrific idea. It was the kind of idea that guys hardly ever get. He decided to ask for advice.

And the person he decided to ask for advice was not just anyone, but his mom.

Schaffran’s mom, Peggy, just happened to be hanging out in the kitchen of the home, listening through a window to her son’s sales pitch. Peggy Schaffran, in addition to being a loyal mom, is also a veteran Tupperware saleswoman. She raised her family through the sale of plastic bowls and knows a thing or two about getting people to buy high-priced goods from a catalog.

“You’re doing fine,” she told John, when he ducked inside to confer about why sales were lagging. “You know the product and you’re pointing out its features. That’s great. Now try offering a premium if they buy a certain amount.”

That’s what they do at Tupperware parties, she said. Buy $100 worth of bowls and get a water bottle, or some such. John Schaffran, wise beyond his years, realized a fellow can learn quite a bit from his sainted mother.

He went back outside and made an announcement.

“Buy $100 worth,” he said, “and you get this automatic pop-off beer bottle opener.”

Free bottle opener

The automatic pop-off bottle opener was a splendid thing. You push the opener down on the bottle and the cap pops off by itself. True, it did not work very well (it took Schaffran four tries to open a bottle with it), but it was made of stainless steel, it looked great, it sold in the catalog for $15 and it was, under the terms of Mom’s inspired plan, absolutely free.

That did it. About half the guys stopped gazing idly at the chicken and began filling out the order forms. And, sure enough, they were ordering just enough stuff from the catalog to push their totals over the magic $100 mark and qualify for the free bottle opener. This proved not only that a guy can be maneuvered into buying high-priced stuff as surely as anyone else but that a son, at any age, can do far worse than put himself in the hands of his mother.

The first-ever multilevel marketing party for men in San Jose was over. And, thanks to mom, it had been yanked to safety at the last moment like an unattended bratwurst beginning to turn black.

After the party, Peggy Schaffran said she was honored that her son was not only following in her footsteps in the catalog party sales business (”The apple never falls far from the tree,” she said) but had chosen to take her advice as well, especially because it was good advice gleaned from 20 years in the plastic bowl trade.

“I know what I’m talking about,” she said.

She picked up the automatic pop-off beer bottle opener and admired its many fine features but wisely, being not only a mom but a veteran of catalog sales premiums, did not try to open a bottle with it.

www.sfgate.com

Today Steve Jobs did another of his long anticipated big reveals. “We want to kick off 2010 by introducing a truly magical and revolutionary new product,” Jobs said early on to ease the throngs of technology journalists and analysts who knew what was coming. Perhaps the worst kept secret since, well, the iPhone, the iPad is a 10-inch touch-screen computer, starting at $499 and available in March. It resembles an oversized iPod Touch. Leading up to the long-speculated launch of Apple’s iPad tablet computer, the publishing industry — newspapers, magazines and books — seemed to be the target. Could the iPad instantly succeed — like the iPod did for digital music before it — where Amazon’s Kindle had been slowly gaining steam? It should come as no surprise that a publisher — the New York Times — was the first partner that was shown during the Apple announcement at the Yerba Buena Center in San Francisco today. “Why did we come out three weeks ago to develop an app for the iPad?” said Martin Nisenholtz, the N.Y. Times senior vice president for digital operations, during the announcement. “We think that we’ve captured the essence of reading a newspaper… all in a native app.” Apple took a direct shot at Amazon with the iBook Store. The application looks like a bookshelf, showing the digital books owned by the user. And of course, a store along the lines of the iTunes Store, where book publishers can sell their virtual wares.

“We’re going to open up the floodgates for the rest of the publishing world starting this afternoon,” Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs said on-stage. Prices shown in the demo appear comparable to Amazon’s Kindle store. Amazon already has an app for its bookstore made for the iPhone, so the company can’t be happy that Apple is stepping into its home court. Yet the Kindle is considered easier on the eyes than the Ipad. For Print Media fans and producers it’s all good.

But the iPad is not just about digitizing the paper. Electronic Arts showed off Need for Speed: Shift, a racing game built for the device. Brushes, a canvas for drawing art (finger-painting?), was also demoed. And the MLB, which has been quick to jump on new application platforms, showed off its live video app.

Compiled from two articles written by Mark Milian for the L.A. Times.

This would have been timelier posted on this past Monday as a form of recognition for Martin Luther King Day, but, as in any worthwhile thing, there is no time like the present. At the start of his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, King stated his case boldly and for all levels of society to hear and understand. In an article found in the London Times authored by Simon Maier and Jeremy Kourdi this speech and this man demonstrate techniques that are helpful for the times when one has to make a presentation that will motivate your listeners to productive action.

Whatever your stage skills (and we all have some), hone them: King had a physically commanding presence. Strong, energetic, tall and broad, he possessed a deep, sonorous voice that had the power to project his message with clarity and authority across America.

Build a powerful rhythm and cadence, using tone and language: King’s speeches had a strong, driving rhythm that was almost musical. It drew the listener in. It comforted and then excited. This came from his speeches’ structure, the tone and use of language. For example, “I have a dream today” is one of several sentences that are repeated at regular intervals in the speech. Like a chorus in a song, it becomes a familiar refrain that people can, and want to, repeat and remember.

Provide a specific, compelling, exciting but truthful vision of the future: King was inclusive, with a message that had an appeal as wide as it was deep. The images and vision of the future invoked by him were powerful and universal.

Know and respect your audience: King understood that his audience passionately wanted progress and change and that they were peaceful, ordinary people. He projected this normality as a stirring and virtuous stand, for example by saying: “Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.”

Use metaphors and familiar, appealing images: King dipped into the natural world as well as the Bible to find stirring, evocative popular images. For example: “Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice.” And: “We will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream”. The images express power: the energy of the Sun, the force of a torrent. The point he is making is that his ideas are both natural and inexorable. The language is superb and soaring.

With the marketplace the way it is at present it’s no wonder that market researchers are more interested in what makes the consumer tick than ever before. What with the new and improved thoughtful spending of the American consumer it’s a harder grab to get and hold the customer’s attention. A recent article in US News and World Report authored by Rick Newman list some ways consumers have changed.

Less credit, more cash. Consumer borrowing has fallen by record amounts, as Americans pay down debt and adjust to banks lowering their credit card limits. Credit card spending dropped sharply in early 2009, moderated, then started plunging again. But overall spending hasn’t fallen quite as much, which suggests more people are paying for purchases in cash.

The end of the monthly payer. Many consumers used to be comfortable piling up debt as long as their income could cover the monthly payments. No more. “The era of unbridled, debt-financed consumer spending is over, and the monthly payer is out of action,” Eric Janszen, president of iTulip, a finance-advisory firm, wrote in Harvard Business Review last year. As consumers focus more on their total debt, they’ll probably buy less and shun high-priced status symbols. But they’ll still spend on certain things.

Greater suspicion. Banks wrecked the economy, then cut lending and raised fees. The government prevented a depression, but not before giving billions to Wall Street titans. Stock prices are surging while jobs disappear. The past few years have been a Great Letdown, among other things, with polls showing that Americans’ confidence in banks, big business, and other pillars of the establishment is at record lows.

More resourcefulness. If you can’t count on anybody else, then you’re likely to rely more on yourself. Americans are taking more responsibility for their own finances and careers, undertaking more do-it-yourself projects, and learning how to cook at home instead of eating out. Travel spending is down, but sales of camping gear are up. Savvy workers are taking more midcareer courses to keep up with turbulent times.

Less brand loyalty. Millions of consumers traded down to store brands over the past couple of years—and many plan to stick with them. The quality of off-price products has turned out to be better than expected, so there may be little reason to pay more for brand-name goods with essentially the same quality. “The shift of consumers away from more expensive products is a widespread trend,” declares a 2009 report from consulting firm McKinsey.

Smaller is bigger. It goes without saying that many things are getting smaller rather than bigger, including household budgets and people’s ambitions. “Smaller things now make the bigger statement,” says the Futures Co., a market-research firm. “Smaller portions, smaller houses, smaller cars, and local communities.”

A rental rebound. The “ownership society” is over. After peaking a few years ago, home ownership rates, not surprisingly, have started a long journey downward, as foreclosures shake out people who couldn’t afford their homes in the first place and tough borrowing standards limit new buyers. The home ownership rate peaked in 2004–2005, when about 70 of households were occupied by owners. That percentage could sink to the low 60s within a decade. A renter’s mentality is extending to other big purchases, like cars and furniture: The Aaron’s rent-to-own furniture chain, for example, has been thriving.

Less window shopping. When you browse, you buy—so more people seem to be eliminating window shopping as a casual pastime. Heather Mitchell of Friendswood, Texas, says that since she stopped making unnecessary trips to the mall, “it’s hard to measure the savings, since I would impulse-buy on those trips to stroll the stores. I’ve also saved a lot in gas and wear and tear on my car.”

More closet shopping. Americans have piled up a lot of goods in recent years, and many people are surprised at how much good clothing or other stuff they’ve squirreled away. “I shop in my closet when the urge hits me to buy something new,” says Paige Hodges of Los Angeles, “and I always find a little treasure that I forgot I had.”

Decluttering. There are a lot of reasons to offload unnecessary accoutrements: Downsizing to a smaller home, getting laid off and doing some spring cleaning, or picking up a few bucks selling stuff you don’t need. “Somebody will always buy the stuff you don’t want,” says Joe Pasquale of Nashville, who sells three or four unused items a week online. “Old routers. Old clothes. A pair of my wife’s Lucky jeans. It’s amazing what people will buy.”

Food frugality. Spending on restaurants is down, but those who do eat out are ordering fewer side dishes and appetizers or substituting an appetizer for a main dish, according to the NPD Group, a market-research firm. Others are cutting back on home meals and taking other steps to reduce food costs. “I find that in shopping for food, the smaller the store, the less I spend,” says Nancy Bymers of Albuquerque. “A smaller store has fewer choices and conveniences. Who really needs three types of peppers diced into bits at over $5? I am very capable of disassembling a pepper.”

More gardening. Veggies from the backyard are usually cheaper, and more healthful, than those from the store. That’s one reason sales of canning equipment have boomed over the past two years. While you’re at it, grow a cut-flower garden, says Lois Barber of Sandy Hook, Conn. “This will allow you to have fresh flowers in your house. They’ll lift your spirits, make you feel rich, and make a great gift if someone invites you over for dinner.”

Less waste. When you have less money, you waste less, for obvious reasons. The Futures Co. thinks this “renunciation of wastefulness” constitutes a movement: “Perhaps more than any other single element, not being wasteful will define overall value in the recovery consumer marketplace,” the firm says in a recent report.

Less healthcare. There’s no upside here. With unemployment skyrocketing, millions have lost health insurance coverage or cut back on care to save money. Some people go without drugs they’ve been prescribed or cut the dosages in half, so the pills last longer. (Not recommended!) In some areas, people are compensating for reduced coverage by taking advantage of free offerings like mammograms or flu shots.

More negotiating. It’s no longer cool to pay the list price for everything, and consumers are less embarrassed asking for discounts. Retail merchants won’t always haggle, but eBay sellers will, and state-your-price websites like Priceline have been booming.

More volunteering. Americans with more time on their hands find it rewarding to spend some of it helping others. “I do volunteer projects to help keep social connections up,” says Kathy Bowman of Joseph, Ore. “Think volunteering at community events, serving on the boards of disability or folk dance organizations, small donations to the humane society or kids’ projects.”

Redefining success. We used to measure it by how much money and stuff we had. Whoops. With jobs scarce and money tight, Americans are seeking more satisfying work—and giving up material goods to get it. Cathy Goerz of San Francisco spent the past year making a low-budget film documentary—a longtime goal—after losing her job at a corporate communications firm. She lives on 75 percent less than before, but she cherishes the freedom: “My quality of life has not changed at all,” she says. “I think it’s improved. I’m not tied down by location, and I don’t have to be under somebody’s gaze eight hours a day.” Now that’s a recovery.

The only good thing about tragedy is that it does have the ability to bring out the best in people. The earthquake and its aftershocks have caused and are still causing devastation in Haiti, yet this has brought about a counter-swell of sympathy from all over the world. Everyone wants to help out, but too much help can cause problems. This is in no way a means to throw a wet blanket on the impulse to help, just some helpful information as to how to focus that help to give the most benefit out of that help. In other words it’s the economics of assistance.

1. Donating Money:
Money is the most efficient way of giving right now since at the moment there at the moment there are no commercial flights into Haiti.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has urged Internet users to be cautious and do their research before giving money to help the relief effort in Haiti.

“Past tragedies and natural disasters have prompted individuals with criminal intent to solicit contributions purportedly for a charitable organization,” the agency said in a statement.

TEXT Giving: many Americans are making donations via text message to help Haiti. The American Red Cross, is taking donations at 90999 (text the word “HAITI” and an automatic $10 donation is made), and you can support the foundation of musician Wyclef Jean by texting the word “Yele” to the number 501501.

Although the above two text methods are above board, the Better Business Bureau notes that this emerging method for donating “is ripe for exploitation by scammers.” It has not heard of any text message scams yet, but they’re probably inevitable. As a result, consumers need to keep a number of things in mind when considering giving by text message as well as by more traditional methods. When giving by text message, the money might not get to where it needs to go for weeks or more, though carriers said they were working to try to speed up the process. “What people may not realize is that it could take up to 90 days before the money actually reaches the charity,” said Art Taylor, president of the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance. His giving advice: “Follow up that $10 donation by going to the Web sites and donating directly.” Or give to the charity Web site’s directly in the first place, call the charity or send a check directly to the charity in the mail.

Here are some more tips from the Better Business Bureau and the F.B.I.:

• Don’t automatically trust the numbers your friends and networks pass along. Instead, confirm the text message number directly with the charity by checking the charity’s Web site. The American Red Cross, for instance, mentions the 90999 number on its site.

• Do not respond to any unsolicited e-mail messages about giving to Haiti, and be skeptical of individuals representing themselves as surviving victims or officials asking for donations via e-mail or social networking sites.

• Be cautious of e-mail messages that claim to show pictures of the disaster areas in attached files, because the files may contain viruses.

• Don’t assume the links your well-meaning friends are sending you are legitimate or represent the best organizations. Before giving, vet the charity you’re giving to to make sure it’s not fraudulent and is best equipped to actually help and use the money responsibly.

2. Food and Clothing Drives:

Drives for food and clothing—while well intentioned— may not necessarily be the quickest way to help those in need – unless the organization has the staff and infrastructure to be able to properly distribute such aid. Ask the charity about their transportation and distribution plans. Be wary of those who are not experienced in disaster relief assistance. A trusted organization of this sort is The Salvation Army in your community. You can visit them or the website, for information about this sort of donation, for over time, all of those things will be needed.

Tips on Vetting a Charity:

* Find out if the charity has an on-the-ground presence in the impacted areas.

Unless the charity already has staff in the effected areas, it may be difficult to get new aid workers to quickly provide assistance.  See if the charity’s website clearly describes what they can do to address immediate needs.

* Find out if the charity is providing direct aid or raising money for other groups.

Some charities may be raising money to pass along to relief organizations.  If so, you may want to consider “avoiding the middleman” and giving directly to charities that have a presence in the region. Or, at a minimum, check out the ultimate recipients of these donations to ensure the organizations are equipped to effectively provide aid.

(If you’re looking for organizations to give to, check out BBB Wise Giving Alliance’s list of charities providing assistance in response to the earthquake.)

Got Guilt? Who doesn’t. It’s human to feel the itches and pangs of regrettable circumstances. To each his or her own as to what we feel guilty about and how deep the guilt goes. There are some still kicking themselves for not getting to everyone on their Christmas Card list. There are those that are not fazed about this because they assure themselves there is only so much one person can do and perhaps they even saved a small sapling by not conquering the Christmas Card list this year. However there are those slights that just don’t go away, that make one lie awake at night wishing for an opportunity to atone.  Well here the internet comes in handy once again. An article from The Wall Street Journal written by Elizabeth Bernstein tells of the new trend of the decades late apology.

Jane Angelich carried the guilt around for more than four decades. Years ago, she had been cruel to someone and had never acknowledged her actions. Often, she thought of the person she had hurt and wondered: Had he ever forgiven her?

Finally, she decided she could carry her burden no longer. So last winter she went online and looked up the person she had mistreated. Then she apologized for telling him to “drop dead” when he called her house back in 1961.

They were both 10 years old at the time.

“When something is nagging at you for 48 years, you need to clear it up,” says Ms. Angelich, 58 years old, a pet-products company chief executive in Novato, Calif. “That was the meanest thing I ever did to anyone.”

Jane Angelich, explained in her email to him that she hung up on him because she didn’t know how to talk to a boy at the time and was embarrassed that her mother was listening. He replied to her apology, she says, and said he did not remember the incident. “It was good to know, though, that luckily he wasn’t scarred for life,” she says.

Along with helping people reconnect with old flames, childhood friends and even long-lost relatives, the Internet is giving rise to a newer phenomenon: the decades-late apology. The Web allows us to converse by email, a form of communication that often makes us braver and more impulsive—and occasionally even more thoughtful—about what we say. There are even Web sites, such as ThePublicApology.com and PerfectApology.com, dedicated to facilitating our quest for absolution.

All this raises the question: Just because there is someone from our past we could apologize to, should we? After all, how effective is an act of contrition—whether proffered over the Web or otherwise—that comes many, many years late?

Consider my friend, who recently received a lengthy email from a guy she dated in college, apologizing for the way he treated her at a bar one night in 1987. He said he had always regretted his behavior. She says she had no idea what he was talking about.

Of course, some apologies—for things like theft or backstabbing a colleague—are serious and really should be made. But we live in a self-help culture, where therapists, 12-step program guides and talk-show hosts are forever reminding us that forgiveness and gratitude are the way to happiness (and sobriety). Many times, a long-overdue apology, much like a confession, does more for the person offering it up than it does for the one receiving it.

When an old high-school rival of Kathy Somes contacted her through Classmates.com last March, Ms. Somes, 46, apologized for her behavior years ago, which included putting gum in the girl’s hair, shooting her with a rubber-pellet gun and blowing a trumpet into her ear during band practice.

“I didn’t really care if she accepted my apology or not,” says Ms. Somes, an investment analyst in Kirtland, Ohio. “I felt better.” (And, she says, her classmate did accept her apology.)

So what do you do if you are overcome with the urge to apologize for something you did ages ago? Here are some tips:

• Make sure you are apologizing for the sake of the other person and not yourself. (A woman I interviewed who apologized to her sister—a year later—for mentioning her weight gain says her sister got upset all over again and accused her of “reminding her that she was fat.”) If your motives are selfish, don’t bother saying you are sorry.

• Resist sending an apology via a social-networking Web site. It’s too flip. Use the phone. Or at least write an email, which demonstrates a little more thoughtfulness.

• Ask how your actions affected the other person. “The best gift you can offer is the willingness to finally hear exactly what the other person felt like as a result of your actions,” says Karen Gail Lewis, a marriage and family therapist in Cincinnati.

• Be sincere. Explain why you did what you did, and why you are apologizing now.

• And—at the risk of sounding like your mother—try to apologize in a timelier manner next time. My 21-month-old nephew Zach did it last weekend, after throwing one of his toys at me. If he can do it, you can too.

An old Proverb says, “Change is the only constant.” That saying only keeps getting truer with the rate technology advances. Once upon a time Monarchs were one of a few things that changed in a century.  In the last fifty years you could get somewhat of a picture of what the world would be like in a decade. Nowadays five years is a tricky leap to hazard a guess about. The office has often been a front line of change, especially in the technology realm. Get ready for the “Thin Client”, which is not the name of a John Grisham diet book.

In a recent article authored by Rachel King for Business Week you’ll get a peek at the beginnings of what may be on your desk in the future.

Tech executive Parikshit Arora had an unconventional response the morning he discovered that his office computer was no longer working. Rather than fixing it himself or calling in help from the information technology department, he discarded the device. “It wasn’t booting up,” says Arora, vice-president for technology at iQor, a company that handles call-center work for clients. “I didn’t even care to find out why. I threw it away and got another one.”

The same goes for most of iQor’s 11,000 employees. Why the seemingly cavalier take on computers? Two years ago, New York-based iQor ditched most of its Dell and Hewlett-Packard desktop computers and installed a fleet of cheaper, stripped-down machines that lacked hard drives. Also made by HP and known as thin clients, these smaller, virtually disposable devices leave most processing and storage tasks to a centrally located server. “We refer to thin clients as lollipops,” says iQor Chief Executive Vikas Kapoor. “If yours isn’t working, just get another one.” Now, about 75% of iQor’s employees use thin clients with files and software stored elsewhere. When a machine dies, staffers get a new one and resume work in minutes.

iQor may be a harbinger of things to come in corporate computing. While traditional laptops and desktops reign supreme in the workplace, accounting for the vast majority of employee computers, companies are increasingly willing to consider alternatives. Some are experimenting with thin clients in a bid to cut costs while many others are betting on netbooks. Employees are spending more work time on smartphones, while Apple’s Mac—once viewed as a machine for artists and educators—is wending its way into corporations. “We’ve got the most diverse offerings of PCs that we’ve ever had,” says Richard Shim, research manager for IDC’s personal computing program, which is now tracking some 20 different kinds of personal computers, up from 16 in 2008.

No single kind of machine has gained wide workplace acceptance. Yet in aggregate, the alternatives reflect a shift in the way corporations think about computing. For instance, the Mac operating system was installed in about 2.7% of corporate computers in July 2008 but the figure had increased to 3.6% by March 2009, according to Forrester Research.

The worldwide thin client market may grow to 7 million units in 2012, from 2.9 million in 2007, according to IDC. Gartner (IT) expects that by 2014, 15% of traditional professional desktop PCs will be replaced by so-called virtual desktops, which also leave most computing and storage tasks to a centrally located computer, rather than maintain them at the employee’s workstation.

Executives at iQor opted for a nontraditional computing environment in large part to save money. “For every dollar I spent buying a PC, I spent 50¢ to the dollar every year maintaining it,” Kapoor says. “There’s a lot of technical expertise that’s required to do that maintenance.” iQor has eliminated its help desk and, before long, expects to cut its IT staff to about a quarter its previous size.

Decisions about what kind of computer to buy will come to a head in 2010 for the multitudes of companies expected to step up hardware purchases as the recession ends. In a November survey of 1,752 IT employees by ChangeWave Research, about 22% of respondents said they plan to increase IT spending in the first quarter of 2010, up from about 10% a year earlier. No longer can chief information officers make a straightforward choice between a desktop or a laptop. Now companies need to assess rising demand for portable computers, smartphones, virtual desktops, and so-called cloud computing, where processing, storage, and other tasks are handled off-site, often by a third-party provider.

Weaning employees off customary equipment isn’t always easy. “Initially [the thin client] wasn’t as fast as our PCs,” says iQor’s Arora. “It was quite frustrating at the beginning,” he says, adding that since the kinks were worked out, everything has functioned as it should. “I feel I have the lashes on my back to show the pain,” CEO Kapoor says.

While growing numbers of companies are toying with alternative computing modes such as thin clients, few have committed to putting thousands of users through the transition, says Annette Jump, research director at Gartner. “In times like this, CIOs are going to experiment with a lot of different technology,” says Ric Echevarria, a vice-president at chipmaker Intel. He says many CIOs conclude that business PCs provide better performance and security and that they’re easier to manage.

No one expects PCs to go away altogether. “Up until now, the center of a corporate user’s universe was their PC, but as we go forward the PC is going to be just one of the key tools that workers use,” says Al Gillen, an analyst at IDC. “The net result is that we’re talking about a PC market that will still grow in size in the future but it won’t be the fastest-growing market anymore—there will be many more options.”

Everyone loves a deal or a legitimate steal.  It should come as no surprise that the authorized dealing and stealing in the marketplace is a well thought out enticement to beckon buyers. Dan Ariely is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Behavioral Economics at MIT. He is also a researcher at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and a visiting professor at Duke University. His book Predictably Irrational starts off with an examination of the use of Free. What follows are excerpts from the first chapter of Predictably Irrational and an interview Dan Ariely gave Kai Ryssdal on NPR’s Marketplace January 4, 2010

Case in Point #1:

The Economist has the following subscription offers: internet only $59, print only $125, print and internet $125

Dan Ariely supposed that the wizards of manipulation at the Economist were trying to get him to avoid the “internet only” option. They knew something important about human behavior. Humans rarely choose things in absolute terms. We don’t have an internal value meter that tells us how much things are worth. Rather we focus on the relative advantage of one thing over another and estimate the value accordingly (For instance we assume a 6 cylinder car is more expensive than a 4 cylinder one, without knowing the basic mechanics that make up the worth of an automobile based on the amount of cylinders it has.)

In the case of the Economist, he may not have known whether the ‘Internet Only” option was a better deal, but he knew that the print-and-internet option for $125 was better than the print only one for $125, in fact you can deduce that in the combination package that the internet is free! Dan had to admit that if he had been inclined to subscribe that he would have taken the package deal. Later when he tested the offer on a large number of participants, the vast majority preferred the internet-and-print deal.

When he gave the Economist subscription offer to 100 students of MIT Sloan School of Management they opted as follows: 16 went for the internet only, 0 print only, 84 internet-and-print. But no doubt they were influenced by the “decoy” internet only option. When this option was removed this time 68 of the students chose the internet only option and 32 chose the internet-and-print option.

Case in Point #2:

Dan Ariely: Imagine that one of your co-workers comes to the office with home-baked cookies, and she’s offering you the cookies for a very cheap price. Let’s say 5 cents per cookie. And she has 100 cookies on the tray, and there are 20 people in the office. How many cookies will you take?

Kai Ryssdal: I’d probably take like five. I’d give her a quarter, and take five cookies.

Dan Ariely: OK, but what would happen if it was free?

Kai Ryssdal: Well, now see, I’m torn here, because I would either take a lot and be a real piggy, or I would take maybe one or two because I wouldn’t want to be a glutton.

Dan Ariely: That’s right. So let’s assume that you would not feel like being a pig. In fact you can actually imagine how if she offered you the cookies for 5 cents a piece, you would feel perfectly fine to take the whole batch, but if she charged you nothing, you would not feel that you can take as much as you really want.

Kai Ryssdal: Is this about the value we put on it, or is it about us internally?

Dan Ariely: It’s about the fact that when something is free all of the sudden different norms get applied to the situation, and you start thinking about other people. So you have lots of other co-workers in the office, and if you took all the cookies to yourself, nobody else would have any cookie. What’s interesting is that when the price is a positive price, like 5 cents, you don’t actually think about the welfare of other people.

Kai Ryssdal: You bet, because I’ve paid my nickel and by gosh, I’m going to take as many cookies as I want, right?

Dan Ariely: But you know this is a good deal. And you have lots of other people in the office that you like and care about. Why don’t you think about their welfare? Don’t you want them to be happy as well?

Kai Ryssdal: Yeah, I suppose. But you know, if the cookies are good, then…

Dan Ariely: But the cookies are also good when they’re free. So what’s interesting is when something is free you all of the sudden think about the welfare of others. But when it costs something, it’s just you and your cost-benefit analysis.

Kai Ryssdal: All right, so take it away from my cookies and me looking out for the welfare of the office, and apply it to real life, then.

Dan Ariely: Well, cookies are real life. This thought, this general idea, I think also has application for the carbon-trade idea.

Kai Ryssdal: Carbon trade as in global warming. We’re going from cookies to global warming?

Dan Ariely: Obviously, what other connections would you make? So think about it, pollution, carbon trade, or recycling, or whatever it is, is in the public goods domain. We think about our kids, the next generation, the welfare of the world. But if it’s not costing us money now we start to apply different norms and different rules. Now I don’t think about the welfare of others. It’s just about what is it worth for me to pollute and not to pollute. I’m actually worried that when we move from a system that we care about our pollution and CO2 emissions, and so on, because of the welfare generally of the world, we’re going to apply a certain norm. If they charge us a lot of money then of course we would be very careful, and we might try to reduce dramatically pollution. But if they don’t charge us that much, it could actually end up backfiring.

Kai Ryssdal: Right, so you’re worried that the politicians won’t be able to agree on a higher price of carbon, so it will be something so small as to be meaningless and maybe even harmful?

Dan Ariely: That’s right. If we started charging a lot of money for it, it would really dramatically change the economy, and I don’t think we understand how this will work. And at the low level I think that rather than getting us to care more, it will actually end up getting us to care less.

http://marketplace.publicradio.org

www.predictablyirrational.com