PSoTD

Here's a little known fact about me - when I was 11 and 12, I delivered TV Guides. They didn't use to mail them, and I think they cost more in the store. They would rely on a delivery system similar to the newspaper kid delivery system, or at least did so to a point.

This was the late 1960s, of course. I had at my biggest point perhaps 20 customers. You had to have 15 as a minimum to keep a route, and I was always at risk of dropping below that. TV Guides cost 15 cents in those days, and I would keep 4 cents of every sale. Woo hoo! 60 to 80 cents a week for an hour's work (except it was always a pain each month to collect, because you'd inevitably have to keep going back to the same houses for the money).

I know they scrapped that system a few years after I did it, and went directly to mail and raised their prices. Didn't seem to hurt them, I guess, although we don't subscribe. There aren't many self-professed ex TV Guide delivery folks on the Internet - I guess the subject just doesn't come up.

Who would buy this?

Playboy bobbleheads...

I don't understand why upscale, million dollar homes would be built without fire hydrants in the neighborhood.

And it's one of the most tense non-life-threatening things I've experienced, particularly when you don't know if you're going to get on a plane.

Farther west, the low-lying Cayman Islands are expected to take a direct hit on Monday. Tourists there jammed Owens International Airport in snaking lines that stretched outside onto a lawn. A police officer with a bullhorn kept order. Under still-sunny skies, many tourists flopped under the shade of a tree outside, surrounded by their luggage.

Cayman Airways added 15 flights to Florida from the wealthy British territory, and they were quickly sold out.

Two years ago our family was in the Caymans when a hurricane threatened the island, and we had to leave early with a throng of others that wanted out, also. Two years before, the island was devastated by a hurricane, a fact that is still visible on the island today. You do NOT want to be on the Cayman Islands during a hurricane.

Cayman Airways seems to be pretty responsible about adding flights to get folks out. But I have to ask - what about the other airlines that fly people in and out every week? I think that most airlines, such as US Air and Continental, fly once a week into the Caymans on Saturday, and hopefully they didn't fly any tourists in today just in time for this hurricane.

I'm sure we'll be able to read about some tourists that were on the Caymans when Hurricane Dean hits, but the question will be whether it was by choice or by airline logistics.

I read this article about a locality trying to put McMansion construction under additional review, and a sentence popped out at me:

"The market is saying young people want larger homes and they're putting them on the lots we have," Russell Dennis, a builder and Wellesley resident, told the board. "You're looking to change the game."

McMansions are usually something of the 6 bedroom, 6 bathroom variety - one of the things I've noticed when reading about them is the ridiculous number of bathrooms they have.

So why do young people need them? Do they have huge families? Expecting to have a huge family? U.S. trends on birthrates point to parenting later, rather than earlier, and smaller families. So, who are these people?

More importantly than that, however, is this - have they thought how their house may be used in 30 years, assuming it stands that long? My house is over 40 years old, and with proper maintenance can serve AT LEAST that long again, barring unexpected acts of God or man. It's a 4 bedroom 3 bathroom home with a good sized lot and lots of flexibility in remodeling - I know, we just went through a big remodel job. It's considerably lower priced in the marketplace than a McMansion, in a good neighborhood with three parks and a creek, and you can buy a house in my neighborhood, spend 200 grand in remodeling it, and still not come to half the price of the McMansions selling around here.

I'm very confident that there will be a marketplace in 30 years for my home, at a decent price for both me and the buyer.

I'm pretty confident that the marketplace for McMansions AS THEY ARE will suck in 30 years. They come complete with high price, restrictive covenants, and an increasingly bad reputation for both value and values.

If I were a locality, I'd be concerned about this, too. And if I were a buyer, I think I'd start wondering, why is the locality so concerned?

I got this taken care of, I guess I'm safe now.

The whole discussion lately about the subprime mortgage debacle has lead to a media treatment of certain lenders as, well, "certain":

The downside for sellers might be the activity is impacting cap rates, the rate of return on property. With so much supply hitting the market, buyers are now demanding a higher cap rate which means a lower price for property.

"We have already seen them level off in certain markets and for certain asset classes. This trend will become even more pronounced in the months ahead," said Mr. Hutcheson.

or...

Weber, who sits on the ECB's Governing Council, said checks with banks show that the dangers are limited. "We have confirmed our impression that the increased risks in certain market segments are insulated, and that the profit impact for credit institutions is limited overall."

In fact, if you look around Google News for long, you realize that many business reports out there recently are loudly proclaiming a company or industry's distance from the subprime market, in language that falls just short of calling the subprime market "icky", "having cooties", etc.

This is all to be expected, but I wonder, when will this stigma fall to the realtors and builders that have been feeding this marketplace? I know that in our area, there are certain realtors that focus on a... higher priced housing market than the average, and they need a hungry market to bring those prices even higher. They need riskier mortgages. They needed the subprime marketplace.

And they benefited from it. So my question is - when will they be stigmatized? When will they be known as "certain real estate brokers"?

Just in case you were wondering.

One of the things that seems to me could improve air travel considerably in this country would be the placement of at least one airport, centrally located in the United States, that only served as a transfer hub for flights. We already have the hub system for various airlines, whether it be in Chicago or Dallas or Atlanta or elsewhere, and I'm not talking about necessarily replacing those, particularly for smaller regional flight systems and for hubs which also tend to serve as final destinations.

But the idea that I have to fly to Atlanta, or wherever, just because only ONE AIRLINE has a transfer hub there, when my whole intention is to get from Denver to Harrisburg, seems to me to be ridiculous. Why couldn't the United States develop a huge property in the middle of the United States in which to create an airport that can serve as a transfer hub for ALL airlines? A place which would only serve as a transfer point, so the airport wouldn't be burdened with the components of air travel that must serve either initial destination or final destination customers, such as initial check-in, or baggage claim, or initial screening security, etc. A place so huge that 5 or 6 large airlines could place their North American - and even regional - transfers within the facility.

Such a place could be developed including the following criteria:

Weather. It would have to provide preferred weather for operations on a high level. We have hubs now that are greatly impacted by weather (hello, O'Hare) and we don't need to replicate that.

Staging City. There would need to be a large city that could be used as the "jumping off" point for development of such an airport, probably within 3-4 hours drive away, so that supplies and labor have an orderly positioning point during the development of the project.

Land - There has to be enough land available to build an airport of this magnitude, and enough land available to set aside for future development of the airport (for example, if successful, more terminals for hubs).

Cost.

Clearly, I'm spitballing, and I'm no expert on airports or hub traffic building or anything like that, but I'd be very interested to read any studies that are along these lines. Such a project, if it could greatly assist air traffic and the flying experience in this country, could also serve as regional economic development engine. But clearly, studies at the detail level of this are required for any serious consideration to be given the idea.

One of the major advantages to such a hub airport, I think, is that resources spent today on passengers using the airport for initial departure or final destination can be spent on how to improve the transfer experience. That's a lot of money, and space, that can be used. Long-term parking, rental cars, airport hotels, baggage claim, security... the list goes on and on.

Another would be even greater flexibility in flight arrangements. Currently, I cannot get from Harrisburg to Bakersfield, California without going through Philadelphia, then Phoenix. Or Philadelphia, then San Francisco. Whatever it is, there's two places I have to go. If we had a national hub, in theory I could get just about anywhere through the hub, particularly if the airlines provide greater handshaking and sharing of flights (and revenue) from connections. If I can take US Air to AAH (America's Airline Hub), then catch a Southwest Flight from there to Bakersfield, and on the return, visa versa, I'd greatly prefer that.

And - I'd probably use Harrisburg's airport as my departure/destination, rather than driving to Philadelphia to leave from there.

Anyways, clearly this is just an idea that's time may never come, but I wanted to put it out there, since I don't see anything else like this being floated on the Internet.

The Yemeni government has hired a European PR firm and increased its security in a move to support its tourism industry following a recent suicide bomb attack, Gulf News reports.

Seven Spanish tourists were killed earlier this month when a suicide bomber drove a bomb-laded truck into the vehicle they were travelling in.

It was the first terrorist attack against tourists in the country, which currently earns around 2% of its GDP from tourism. Tour operators say the attack has lost them more than half of July bookings from European travellers. Trademark Tourism, which operates affiliates in Europe, Asia and Latin America, has been appointed to portray the country as safe to travel in and emphasise its culture, history and natural beauty.

The government will host a series of summer festivals to attract Gulf tourists, which account for three quarters of tourism revenues. It will also invite foreign media to the country in coming months to report on their experiences and help change perceptions.

Minister of Tourism Nabeel Hassan Al Fakih said security measures include placing 15 additional police vehicles to protect the road to the popular Hadramaut region.